Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Singapore

Indonesia and Singapore enjoy strong relations which are underpinned by deep ties and strong economic relations across different industries. This is exemplified by the regular business cooperation between Indonesian companies and their Singaporean counterparts. However, business dealings give rise to disputes from time to time. This article addresses how a party who has obtained a court judgment in Indonesia can enforce it in Singapore.

In Singapore, a party who has obtained a judgment from a foreign court (hereinafter referred to as a “foreign judgment”) can seek to enforce it in Singapore either by:

1. registering the foreign judgment under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act 1959 (“REFJA”); or
2. commencing a common law action for the enforcement of the foreign judgment.

The party seeking to enforce the foreign judgment (hereinafter referred to as a “judgment creditor”) must first consider whether the foreign judgment can be enforced under REFJA. If it can, the judgment creditor should do so as the REFJA was intended to, as far as possible, replace the common law action for enforcement of a foreign judgment.

If a judgment creditor does not satisfy the elements required to register the foreign judgment under the REFJA in Singapore, it will have to commence a common law action to enforce the foreign judgment.

When does the REFJA apply?

A judgment creditor seeking to enforce a foreign judgment under the REFJA will have to satisfy the following elements when applying to the Singapore courts to register the foreign judgment:

1. the foreign judgment must have been obtained in a foreign country which affords reciprocal treatment to judgments given in Singapore. The reciprocating countries gazette under REFJA are Brunei, Australia, India, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China;
2. the foreign judgment must be issued by a superior court in a foreign country which affords reciprocal treatment to judgments given in Singapore (which are gazetted under REFJA);
3. the foreign judgment is final and conclusive as between the parties to it, regardless of any appeal; and
4. the application to register the foreign judgment is made within 6 years after the date of the foreign judgment or the date of the last foreign judgment in the foreign proceedings if there is an appeal.

A judgment creditor who is unable to satisfy the elements required to register a foreign judgment under the REFJA is not without recourse. It can instead commence a common law action in Singapore to enforce the foreign judgment.

Indonesia is not a designated reciprocating country under the REFJA. As such, judgments obtained in the Indonesian courts cannot be registered under the REFJA, and a judgment creditor seeking to enforce such a judgment in Singapore must do so by way of a common law action instead.

Enforcement of foreign judgments by way of a common law action

Under the Limitation Act 1959, a judgment creditor has 6 years from the date of the foreign judgment to commence a common law action to enforce the foreign judgment.

A judgment creditor commencing a common law action in Singapore for the enforcement of a foreign judgment will have to satisfy the following elements:

1. the foreign judgment has to be a judgment against a person or entity (i.e. a judgment in personam), and not judgment against a property (i.e. a judgment in rem);
2. the foreign judgment is final and conclusive;
3. the foreign judgment is rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction; and
4. the judgment must be for a definite and ascertained sum of money (simple mathematical calculation required for the ascertainment of the sum will be treated as being ascertained).  

However, the Singapore courts will not enforce a foreign judgment if it was procured by fraud, its enforcement would be contrary to public policy or the proceedings in which it was obtained were contrary to natural justice.

Under Singapore law, a foreign judgment may be final and conclusive even if there is an appeal pending in the country where the foreign judgment was rendered.

The Singapore Court of Appeal decision of Poh Soon Kiat v Desert Palace Inc (trading as Caesars Palace) [2010] 1 SLR 1129 (“Poh Soon Kiat”) provides guidance on the enforcement of foreign judgments by way of common law action in Singapore.

In Poh Soon Kiat, the respondent sought to recover a foreign gambling debt owed by the appellant by commencing an action for the enforcement of foreign judgment obtained in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara in 2001. The judgment had set aside a fraudulent transfer of the appellant’s interest in a property and ordered that it be sold and proceeds applied to satisfy the judgment debt owing to the respondent under a judgment in 1999 from the same court. The appellant applied to set aside on the grounds that, amongst others, the foreign judgment obtained in 2001 was not for a fixed sum of money, and that the action was time-barred. The Singapore Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and held, amongst others, that:

1. the 2001 California judgment was not for a fixed sum of money as it was not a fresh obligation on the appellant to pay the balance of the judgment debt owed under the 1999 California judgment. As such, the 2001 California judgment could not be enforced by way of a common law action; and
2. the limitation period applicable to a common law action for the enforcement of a foreign judgment is 6 years from the time the foreign judgment was issued under the Limitation Act 1959 as it is an action of debt brought upon the foreign judgment.

Conclusion

Because Indonesia sits outside the REFJA's list of reciprocating countries, a judgment creditor with an Indonesian judgment has, at present, only one option open to it in Singapore: a fresh common law action treating the judgment as founding a debt.

Early planning is crucial, as illustrated from the case of Poh Soon Kiat. The 6 year limitation period begins running from the date the Indonesian judgment becomes final and conclusive, not from whenever enforcement in Singapore is contemplated. Judgment creditors should therefore avoid delaying enforcement in Singapore and proper consideration should be given to whether the Indonesian judgment can be considered to be one for a definite and fixed sum.

This article was written for and first published on Beyond Legal Partnership’s website.

Disclaimer: The information provided does not constitute legal advice and does not purport to give rise to a lawyer-client relationship. You are fully responsible for seeking specific legal advice from a lawyer before taking any legal action. Should you require legal advice, you may contact us at info@covenantchambers.com.