Postponing Limitation Periods for Fraud: Singapore High Court Clarifies Contours of Fraud Exceptions in Sections 29(1)(a) and (b) of the Limitation Act 1959

Under Singapore law, claimants are required to bring certain types of actions within six years of the accrual of their cause of action, failing which they are time-barred from doing so. To mitigate the potential harshness of this rule, the Limitation Act 1959 (“LA“) allows time to be postponed in some exceptional circumstances. 

Of particular note are the fraud exceptions in section 29(1)(a) and (b) of the LA, the precise contours of which have been the subject of recent debate. In SW Trustees Pte Ltd v Teodros Ashenafi Tesemma and others [2023] SGHC 273, the Singapore High Court clarifies two thorny questions on how the fraud exceptions apply in Singapore where conspiracy is alleged. In particular:

• For section 29(1)(a), the High Court has clarified for the first time that limitation periods can be postponed only if fraud is an essential element of the cause of action; and
• For section 29(1)(b), any fraudulent concealment must have been committed by the specific defendant against whom time is sought to be postponed.

Wilson Zhu, Lye Yu Min and Naomi Lim of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP’s Restructuring & Insolvency Practice acted for the successful Appellant in this case.