High Court dismisses Ng Yu Zhi's appeal to halt civil suit against him, Envy Global Trading

THE High Court has dismissed an appeal by Ng Yu Zhi, a businessman at the centre of an alleged US$1.1 billion nickel trading scam, to put a pause to a civil suit against him and Envy Global Trading, where he was director.

Ng, 34, had sought a stay on the lawsuit, which was initiated by construction company Debenho and its managing director Low Teck Dee, on grounds that he would be prejudiced if it proceeds since he also faces criminal charges arising out of the same facts.

Among his arguments are that he enjoys the "right of silence" and the "privilege against self-incrimination", and that he would be compelled to reveal his defence to the criminal charges in the civil suit if it proceeds.

The latter would give state prosecutors a significant advantage that they would not otherwise have, Ng further argued.

But in dismissing Ng's appeal on Friday (Jan 14), High Court Judge Ang Cheng Hock said the burden is on Ng to show that there is a "real danger" that the continuance of the civil action against him will result in injustice in the criminal proceedings.

Pointing out that this can then ensure that it is "just and convenient" that the plaintiffs' ordinary rights of having his claim heard and decided are interfered with, Judge Ang added: "It will not suffice for the defendant to merely point to notional dangers."

GET BT IN YOUR INBOX DAILY

Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.

Sign UpVIEW ALL

Judge Ang also stated that while it was once a rule of the common law that the court would halt a civil action when criminal prosecutions arising out of the same events were also pending, the modern approach is to assess the matter not as a rule but a question of judicial discretion.

Ng, the former director of Envy Asset Management and Envy Global Trading, was arrested in February 2021 and first charged with cheating and fraudulent trading in March.

He currently faces 75 criminal charges and remains on bail. The court had heard that he allegedly raised at least S$1 billion from investors for fake deals related to nickel trading in one of Singapore's largest investment fraud schemes.

The civil suit was brought on by 2 of such investors. Court documents stated that Debenho and Low entered into 5 contracts with Envy Global Trading as part of the scheme between November 2020 and January 2021, and parted with S$20.1 million as a result.

Moving on to Ng's "right of silence" point, Judge Ang said the right of silence only entitles the defendant to stay silent in the face of compulsory questioning that has arisen in connection with criminal proceedings, such as police investigations or when he is called upon to testify during trial. It is "not for all other purposes", Judge Ang stated.

"When a defendant defends himself in the civil action, whether by filing his defence or giving evidence in support of his defence, he does so of his own choosing and not under any compulsion on pain of punishment, and so he has no grounds for invoking the right of silence," he added.

As for Ng's "privilege against self-incrimination" point, Judge Ang pointed out that a defendant is "free to plead whatever facts he deems fit and considers relevant", including to deny the plaintiff's allegations and put forward a different version of events.

The judge added: "There is no compulsion on the defendant to state on affidavit matters that might incriminate himself.

"In fact, any defence put forward by the defendant, and any evidence given in support of it, would presumably have the effect of tending to exculpate rather than incriminate the defendant."

Meanwhile, Judge Ang said he could not accept Ng's submission that the continuance of the suit would give the prosecution some advantage in the criminal proceedings.

Even if the prosecution were to enjoy a preview of Ng's case as a result of the civil action, it is not the case that any evidence given or adduced by Ng in the civil case can in turn be relied upon by the prosecution in criminal proceedings, he said.

The prosecution remains "limited" in proving its case on the basis of evidence which has been admitted in the criminal proceedings, not any evidence that has emerged in the course of the concurrent civil action, he added.

READ MORE: 

• Ng Yu Zhi allegedly splashed over S$100m on supercars, watches, property; faces 6 more charges

• Ng Yu Zhi faces another 18 charges; allegedly swindled 2 investors out of S$20 million