The abuse of process jurisdiction, which forms part of the doctrine of res judicata, is meant to uphold finality of litigation and prevent abusive litigation. While the jurisdiction has been applied to the original parties of earlier court proceedings, it could also prevent a person who was not part of earlier court proceedings from litigating his claim. In such circumstances, the abuse of process doctrine has to be cognisant of the commercial realities and motivations driving choices to advance separate rather than consolidated proceedings, while also protecting litigants from repeated litigation. A recent Singapore Court of Appeal decision imposed constraints to applying the abuse of process jurisdiction to persons not involved in earlier proceedings. It also departed from the UK jurisprudence in its assessment of a person’s decision to defer his action till the completion of a closely related case. This note discusses the impact of the decision on the future ambit of the abuse of process jurisdiction, and highlights the crucial interests that should be balanced in determining whether abuse of process applies to new parties.
res judicata, abuse of process, virgin atlantic, issue estoppel, cause of action estoppel
Civil Procedure | Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
Civil Justice Quarterly
Sweet and Maxwell
QUEK ANDERSON, Dorcas.
Defining the limits to abuse of process: Lim Geok Lin Andy v Yap Jin Meng Bryan. (2018). Civil Justice Quarterly. 37, (1), 40-47. Research Collection School Of Law.
Available at: http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2598
Copyright Owner and License
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.