§

Latest articles

Singapore

Supply Act 2024

Supply Act 2024 (No. 8 of 2024) Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026 Print Select the provisions you wish to print using the checkboxes and then click the relevant "Print" Select All Clear All Print - HTML Print - PDF Print - Word Supply Act 2024 (No. 8 of 2024) Table of Contents Long Title Ena

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Re Lim Kiap Khee [2001] SGHC 160

– Intention to deceive not required – Breach of undertaking to pay of moneys held as stakeholder – s 83(2)(b) Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 1994 Ed) Legal Profession – Show cause action – Misconduct unbefitting advocate and solicitor – Failure to deposit stakeholder moneys into client account – s

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

UJN v UJO [2021] SGCA 18

very next day and $50,000 to a bank account of each of the two sons jointly held with her. 11 The husband alleged that the wife had agreed all along that his salary and bonus from ZP had been credited into the parties’ joint account, ie, the POSB a/c. It was only after the first hearing (out of four

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

CEQ v CER [2020] SGHC 70

parliamentary intent. Second, the defendant pointed to existing case authorities that “speak with one voice in showing that a contractor who has performed works under a construction contract can continue to claim for such works even after its employment under the contract has been terminated […] bec

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

Grabcar Pte. Ltd. [2019] SGPDPC 14

in Re Habitat for Humanity Singapore Ltd [2018] SGPDPC 9 and Re National University of Singapore [2017] SGPDPC 5, reasonable security arrangements can include policies and practices as well as training. The Organisation ought to have put in place more detailed guidance for GrabHitch drivers to e

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

Art Ask Agency SL v Person(s) Unknown (“LXS-WL STORE”) and others [2023] SGHCR 14

by AMS for the purpose of providing the AMS services. 11 AMS explained that in respect of the 214 enforcement respondents who are the subject of the NOA, each had its own AMS account save for 3 pairs of enforcement respondents who held 3 shared accounts. AMS furnished an Excel spreadsheet which

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

Builders Hub Pte Ltd v JP Nelson Equipment Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 120

on 13 October 2022 to determine the jurisdictional issues prior to any consideration of the merits.33 10 On 27 October 2022, the learned Adjudicator released his written adjudication determination (the “Adjudication Determination”) dismissing SOP/AA 164 of 2022 on the basis that PC 40 fell outs

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

M+W Singapore Pte Ltd v Leow Tet Sin and another [2015] SGHC 10

experience and he held this appointment in JDD concurrently with his position as director of Japan Land. Like the first defendant, he did not receive extra remuneration for the new post. The Construction Contract and the search for investors 7 In April 2008, JDD invited tenderers to quote for the co

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

Store+Deliver+Logistics Pte Ltd v Chin Siew Gim (trading as S G Chin and Associates) [2012] SGHC 89

that Expedite succeeded under its claim in the sum of $418,231.91 whereas the plaintiff succeeded under its counterclaim in the sum of $87,134.36. The result was a net sum of $331,097.55 due from the plaintiff to Expedite, along with interest at 6% per annum. The plaintiff’s claims 20 The plaintiff’

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

VXM v VXN [2021] SGHCF 37

TCT v TCU [2015] 4 SLR 227 (“TCT v TCU”) had considered Prasenjit and held that the principles applicable to s 69 applications (ie that the husband has neglected or refused to maintain the wife and children) also apply to interim maintenance applications in the context of s 113(1)(a) of the Charter

Sushant Shukla· ·19 min read
Singapore

Dongwoo Mann+Hummel Co Ltd v Mann+Hummel GmbH [2008] SGHC 67

from Dongwoo and disclosed only to the tribunal. BKL requested the tribunal to disregard M+H’s letter of 19 May 2006 and to order M+H to abide by the original deadline of 26 May 2006 in the 1st Ruling to supply the documents requested because of the following reasons: (a) It was highly objectionable

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

The "Melati" (No 2)

that the orders of Ang J were not orders refusing to strike out a statement of claim. They were really interlocutory orders which would come under s 34(1)(c) of the SCJA where an appeal could only be brought if the judge certifies, on an application made within seven days, that he or she requires no

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

The Owners of the Ship or Vessel "Pioneer Glory" and Another v P.T. GE Astra Finance

world-wide, he determined that the value of the equipment in question had depreciated by approximately 10% to 25% over the period of the detention. In this regard, he consulted colleagues in US and UK before concluding that the actual fall in value for the equipment in question during the period of

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

CFJ & Anor v CFL & Anor

(1) CFL (2) CFM … Defendants JUDGMENT [Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside] Version No 2: 01 Feb 2023 (17:52 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND ...........

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

BXY & 2 Ors v BXX & 2 Ors

BYC … Defendants JUDGMENT [Arbitration] — [Conduct of arbitration] — [Preliminary issues] Version No 1: 27 Oct 2020 (22:41 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................2 THE CHALLENGE TO JURISDICTION BEFORE THE T

Sushant Shukla· ·18 min read
Singapore

CEB v CEC

that the plaintiff was in breach of contract in terminating the six contracts for the supply of castor oil. He however rejected CEE’s claim in relation to the alleged loss of opportunity to produce sebacic acid (see paras 70– 71 of the CEE Award). 18 In para 74 of the CEE Award, the Arbitrator exp

Sushant Shukla· ·20 min read
Singapore

POSH SEMCO PTE LTD v MAKAMIN PETROLEUM SERVICES CO & Anor

judgment”)) and to the grounds for my decision when giving summary judgment for part of the plaintiff’s claim against the Second Defendant (“OWG”) on 6 September 2019 in respect of its liability under the guarantee given by it on 24 October 2014 (the “OWG Guarantee”). The part of the claim for wh

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

CIP v CIQ

[Award] — [Recourse against award] — [Setting aside] Version No 1: 19 Nov 2021 (15:16 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

Tozzi Srl v Bumi Armada Offshore Holdings Limited & Anor

rmada Offshore Holdings Limited (2) Bumi Armada Berhad … Defendants JUDGMENT [Contract] — [Formation] — [Right of first refusal] [Contract] — [Intention to create legal relations] [Contract] — [Breach] [Tort] — [Inducement of breach of contract] Version No 2: 27 Oct 2020 (22:40 hrs) TABLE OF CONTE

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

SK LATERAL RUBBER & PLASTIC TECHNOLOGIES (SUZHOU) CO., LTD v LATERAL SOLUTIONS PTE LTD

by SKL for the manufacture of parts. Lateral claims damages for wrongful detention or conversion of the equipment. Fourthly, Lateral says that SKL wrongfully ceased to supply parts under the Agreement, which it alleges by discussion and conduct was or became a long term supply agreement, and cla

Sushant Shukla· ·19 min read
Singapore

Teras Offshore Pte Ltd v Teras Cargo Transport (America) LLC

Defendant JUDGMENT [Contract] – [Breach] – [Non-payment] [Contract] – [Contractual terms] – [Scope of work] Version No 1: 27 Oct 2020 (22:40 hrs) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 THE LNG PROJECTS AND TH

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

MOHAMED SHIYAM v TUFF OFFSHORE ENGINEERING SERVICES PTE LTD

the Assistant Registrar’s decision to grant unconditional leave to defend, but ordered that some minor additional parts of the Defence be struck out. 19 The Amended Defence, amended in accordance with these decisions, was filed on 27 November 2020. 20 On 9 December 2020, the defendant applied fo

Sushant Shukla· ·19 min read
Singapore

CJM & 6 Ors v CJT

iffs And (1) CJT … Defendant JUDGMENT [Civil Procedure] — [Costs] Version No 1: 27 Aug 2021 (17:44 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 PRE-TRANSFER COSTS...................................................

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

CLQ v CLR

by the Government, a letter from a competent Governmental authority authorizing the Government to hold shares in that company, is required to be submitted along with company registration documentation. Furthermore, a letter from a competent Governmental authority authorizing the appointment of

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read