Anan Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd v VTB Bank (Public Joint Stock Co) [2019] SGCA 41

Outcome: Application allowed

Facts

1            The applicant filed an application to adduce fresh evidence on appeal.

Court’s Decision:

2            The threefold requirements in Ladd v Marshall are: first, it must be shown that the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the trial or hearing; secondly, the evidence must be such that, if given, it would probably have an important influence on the result of the case, though it need not be decisive; thirdly, the evidence must be such as is presumably to be believed, or in other words, it must be apparently credible, though it need not be incontrovertible: at [21].

3            The fulfilment of the Ladd v Marshall conditions does not bind the court’s hands in admitting fresh evidence, and conversely the court is not prevented from admitting fresh evidence even in the absence of strict compliance with these conditions. Rather, the court retains its overarching discretion to act as the interests of justice require, which includes the discretion to admit new evidence despite the applicant’s failure to satisfy the conditions of Ladd v Marshall: at [37].

4            For example, in cases involving the welfare and custody of children, it might be important to investigate the possibility of truth at the expense of finality. Thus, the rule in Ladd v Marshall has at times been relaxed in the appropriate cases, although not without due regard for the desirability of finis litium. However, not every case involving the interests of children should see a relaxation of the rule in Ladd v Marshall in favour of admitting all evidence that might have a bearing on the outcome of the appeal. The interests of children and the statutory regime governing the proceedings in this area often mean that the finality of proceedings remains a valid if not a heightened consideration: at [47] and [49].

This summary is provided to assist the public to have a better understanding of the Court’s judgment. It is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court. All numbers in bold font and square brackets refer to the corresponding paragraph numbers in the Court’s judgment.