James Foong J

This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the order of the Senior Assistant Registrar ('the SAR') in dismissing its O. 14 application made under the Rules of the High Court 1980 ('the RHC').

The primary issue taken here and below by the defendant flows from the following chronology of events:

(1) On 22 December 1998 the plaintiff filed a writ of summons against the defendant and it was duly served on the latter on 25 December 1998.

(2) On 23 December 1998, the defendant entered, with leave of court, a conditional appearance.

(3) On 29 December 1998, duly complying with the term set by the court for the conditional appearance, the defendant filed an application (encl 5) to set aside the plaintiff's writ of summons.

(4) On 9 January 1999, the plaintiff filed an application (encl 8) under O. 14 of RHC against the defendant.

(5) Enclosures 5 and 8 respectively were heard consecutively by the SAR on 27 January 1999.

(6) Both enclosures were dismissed.

It is and was the defendent's contention that the plaintiff's O. 14 application was filed prematurely, when the conditional appearance of the defendant was still subsisting.

I am in full agreement with thi