This paper seeks to analyse the impact of Singapore’s current banking secrecy regime on pre-action discovery. There are broadly four possible avenues for pre-action discovery in Singapore: a Norwich Pharmacal order, a Bankers Trust order, pre-action discovery under the Rules of Court, and a bankers’ books application under the Evidence Act. However, given Singapore’s banking secrecy regime, it is likely that only one route, that of a bankers’ books application, may be available for parties who require pre-action discovery from banks. Nonetheless, it is suggested that the principles governing pre-action discovery and the policy considerations emerging from the case law, may inform the development of the nascent bankers’ books jurisprudence. A matter of terminology should be clarified at the outset: the term ‘disclosure’ is used in English law to describe the process by which a party to proceedings discloses relevant documentary evidence, while the term ‘discovery’ (commonly associated with US civil litigation) is the term used in Singapore broadly to describe the same process. Both terms are used interchangeably in this article with no intent to draw a distinction between them.