A creditor with unpaid invoices applied to be substituted as a plaintiff in winding-up proceedings against the debtor as the original plaintiff was applying to withdraw the winding-up application. The creditor had a judgment and a statutory demand against the debtor but both occurred after the commencement of the winding-up proceedings against the debtor.
The High Court of Singapore held that the creditor could be substituted as a plaintiff in the winding-up proceedings as they had the right to make a winding-up application against the debtor as at the date of the original winding-up application, due to the existence of outstanding unpaid invoices. The invoices were in existence as at the date of the original winding-up application.
Under Singapore winding up rules, a party with the “right to make the winding-up application” may be substituted as a claimant in a winding-up application against a company.
This case is significant in clarifying the necessary requirements to be substituted as a plaintiff in winding-up proceedings against a company.
Prospaq Group Pte Ltd v Yong Xing Construction Pte Ltd  SGHC 27