Arrest And Security For Foreign Court Proceedings – Clearing The Air On The Eurohope

The High Court of Singapore in the case of The Eurohope [2017] SGHC 218 (Eurohope) has held that a court in Singapore would not allow a ship arrest if the sole purpose of the arrest is to obtain security for foreign court proceedings as this amounts to an "abuse of process".

In The Eurohope there was a charterparty containing an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the High Court of London. The charterer had a dispute with the ship owner and commenced a court action against the ship owner in London. When the vessel arrived at Singapore the charterer commenced an action against the Vessel and arrested the Vessel for the sole purpose of obtaining security for the London proceedings. The High Court of Singapore set aside the warrant of arrest and struck out the action in Singapore on the basis that the charterer's action in Singapore was an "abuse of process".

The legal position in Singapore has been that an arrest of a vessel in Singapore for security in aid of foreign court proceedings is not allowed. In The Eurohope, the court appears to have elevated the arresting party's conduct attempt to arrest the vessel to an abuse of process. It is telling that on the reported facts of the case, the arresting party did not assert in the evidence supporting the arrest that they were prepared to have the substantive action determined in Singapore.

Interestingly there was an unreported case of United Endurance Adm in Rem 108/2007 (United Endurance) in which a seller of bunkers commenced a court action in Greece against a ship owner but arrested the Vessel in Singapore for the sole purpose of obtaining security for the Greek proceedings. After the arrest, the seller applied to stay the Singapore action in favour of the Greek proceedings. The High Court of Singapore allowed the stay on condition that the ship...