Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao

Q: Which legislation does [2024] SGHC(A) 9 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2024] SGHC(A) 9 High Court (Appellate Division) 25 March 2024 AD/CA 122/2023 ( AD/SUM 48/2023 ) 17 min read

7 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

the appeal was dismissed by the appellate court.

Source: [2024] SGHC(A) 9, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 25 March 2024. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (Appellate Division)
Decided	25 March 2024
Judges	Kannan Ramesh, See Kee Oon
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	Braddell Brothers LLP, K&L Gates Straits Law LLC, Trident Law Corporation, Chan Yu Jie, Jerrie Tan Qiu Lin, Kronenburg Edmund Jerome, Lim Yanqing Esther Candice, Lokman Hakim bin Mohamed Rafi, Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik, Narayanan Sreenivasan, Partheban s/o Pandiyan, Tan Lai Tian Timothy, Tang Kai Qing, Thrumurgan s/o Ramapiram

Source: [2024] SGHC(A) 9, High Court (Appellate Division), decided 25 March 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 25 June 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Striking out Civil Procedure — Appeals — Right of appeal

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (2)

Kannan Ramesh Delivered See Kee Oon Coram

Counsel (14)

Braddell Brothers LLP Firm K&L Gates Straits Law LLC Firm Trident Law Corporation Firm Chan Yu Jie Counsel Respondent Jerrie Tan Qiu Lin Counsel Appellant Kronenburg Edmund Jerome Counsel Respondent Lim Yanqing Esther Candice Counsel Respondent Lokman Hakim bin Mohamed Rafi Counsel Appellant Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik Counsel Appellant Narayanan Sreenivasan Counsel Appellant Partheban s/o Pandiyan Counsel Appellant Tan Lai Tian Timothy Counsel Appellant Tang Kai Qing Counsel Respondent Thrumurgan s/o Ramapiram Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Lee Wee Ching Appellant Wang Piao Respondent

Case Significance

Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao [2024] SGHC(A) 9 is a Grounds of Decision of the Appellate Division of the High Court (Civil Appeal No 122 of 2023, Summons No 48 of 2023), heard on 20 February 2024 and delivered on 25 March 2024 by Kannan Ramesh JAD, sitting with See Kee Oon JAD. AD/SUM 48/2023 was the respondent Wang Piao's application to strike out the appellant Lee Wee Ching's notice of appeal in AD/CA 122/2023, raising the question of whether the appellant's right of appeal was circumscribed or fettered by the Rules of Court 2021. The court answered that question in the negative and dismissed the striking-out application with costs to the appellant. The underlying dispute arose from HC/OC 406/2022, in which Wang Piao, Lee Wee Ching and Bryan Tio Geok Hong were shareholders of Apek Services (Pte) Ltd, a Singapore-incorporated company involved in the manufacture and repair of process control equipment. The catchwords identify the issues as civil procedure relating to the striking out of appeals and the right of appeal.

[2024] SGHC(A) 9 explained

Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao ([2024] SGHC(A) 9) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (Appellate Division) on 25 March 2024. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2024] SGHC(A) 9 about?

Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao ([2024] SGHC(A) 9) is a High Court (Appellate Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Appeals — Striking out” and “Civil Procedure — Appeals — Right of appeal”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2024] SGHC(A) 9 consider?

The judgment refers to Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What was decided in Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao [2024] SGHC(A) 9?

The Appellate Division, in a decision delivered by Kannan Ramesh JAD on 25 March 2024, dismissed Wang Piao's application to strike out Lee Wee Ching's notice of appeal, with costs to the appellant. It held that the appellant's right of appeal was not circumscribed or fettered by the Rules of Court 2021.

What question did the striking-out application in [2024] SGHC(A) 9 raise?

The application raised the question of whether the appellant Lee Wee Ching's right of appeal was circumscribed or fettered by the Rules of Court 2021. The court, comprising Kannan Ramesh JAD and See Kee Oon JAD, answered the question in the negative and dismissed the application.