← All Authorities
Singapore set offstrike out and summary judgment

Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Gideon

[2006] 1 SLR(R) 629
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore High Court
Year2006
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Equitable set-off may be raised as a defence where the cross-claim is so closely connected to the main claim that it would be inequitable to enforce the claim without taking the cross-claim into account.

Key Principle

equitable set-off; requirements for raising equitable set-off as a defence

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya Gideon and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Su Emmanuel v Emmanuel Priya G...