In the context of amendment to a writ in rem this case in the High Court of Singapore1 turned primarily on the nature of an action in rem, and in particular on the question whether the addition of “sister ships” means the addition of new defendants. The case also raised questions of the approach to amendment and renewal of writs after the limitation period applicable to the claim had expired.

The plaintiffs were cargo owners claiming damage to cargo shipped on board the defendants’ vessel Brani Island. The bills of lading provided, as normal, that the carriers should be discharged from liability unless suit was brought within one year of delivery of the goods. The goods were delivered on 27 October 1979 and after fruitless negotiations a writ in rem was issued on 16 October 1980. The writ was issued against “The Owners of the ship or vessel Brani Island”. On 21 April 1981 (i.e. well in excess of a year after delivery of the goods) the writ was amended by substituting “The Owners of the ships or vessels Brani Island, Senang Island, Kusu Island”. On 14 October 1981 on an ex parte application the Registrar granted renewal of the amended writ for a further 12 months from 16 October 1981.

On 8 April 1981 the plaintiffs had instructed agents to keep a watch on the three vessels later named in the writ with a view to service of the writ on one of them. The agents failed to notice that the Senang Island was in Singapore between 18 and 24 April 1981 and the Kusu Island in Singapore on three occasions between June and September 1981. The Brani Island was broken up during the last quarter of 1980. At the time of the application to renew the writ the plaintiffs did not know of the visits of the Senang Island and Kusu Island to Singapore, and they did not know of the break-up of the Brani Island until early 1982.

On 24 October 1981 the writ was served on the Kusu Island and the defendants applied to set aside either or both of the amendment and renewal of the writ. The Registrar allowed both applications and the plaintiffs appealed. Lai Kew Chai, J., allowed the appeal against the setting aside of the amendment but upheld the setting aside of the renewal.

The major question of interest goes to the amendment but it is perhaps worth noting that the learned judge applied the criteria of Heaven v. Road and Rail Wagons Ltd.2 to the question of renewal. As the application for renewal was after the expiry of the period of limitation the plaintiffs had therefore to show “exceptional circumstances” for the writ to be renewed. However, in The Angelina the Great 3 the English Court of