Latest articles
CHY & Anor v CIA
that the Award was enforceable and I was provided with a copy of the court’s judgment. The plaintiffs stated that they disagreed with that judgment and intended to file an appeal. I understand that the Supreme Court of India has now dismissed the plaintiffs’ application for leave to appeal. The
DNZ v DOA & Anor
bitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside] Version No 1: 09 Jan 2026 (11:38 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 FACTS....................................................................
AKRO GROUP DMCC v DISCOVERY DRILLING PTE. LTD.
In summary, the plaintiff, AKRO Group DMCC (“AKRO”), commenced the proceedings in the High Court in December 2016 against the defendant, Discovery Drilling Pte Ltd (“DDPL”), seeking payment of US$3,202,559.63 for allegedly outstanding project management fees. DDPL denied its indebtedness on vari
MACQUARIE BANK LIMITED v GRACELAND INDUSTRY PTE. LTD.
In summary, it is Macquarie’s case that the Transaction was made in the course of certain emails in May 2014 and recorded in a Long Form Version No 1: 27 Oct 2020 (22:40 hrs) Macquarie Bank Ltd v Graceland Industry Pte Ltd [2018] SGHC(I) 05 Confirmation (“LFC”) dated 6 June 2014 incorporating the
ARRIS SOLUTIONS, INC. & 2 Ors v ASIAN BROADCASTING NETWORK (M) SDN. BHD.
The Plaintiffs applied for summary judgment for sums alleged to be due to the Plaintiffs from the Defendant for equipment and services provided pursuant to a number of different but related contracts. 2 After hearing counsel on 9 January 2017, this court unanimously granted judgment to the Second
TAMAR PERRY & Anor v BONNET ESCULIER SERVANE MICHELE THAIS & Anor
Esculier Servane Michele Thais (2) Jacques Henri Georges Esculier … Defendants Counterclaim Between (1) Bonnet Esculier Servane Michele Thais (2) Jacques Henri Georges Esculier … Plaintiffs in Counterclaim And (1) Tamar Perry (2) Solid Fund Private Foundation … Defendants in Counterclaim Versio
CUW & 2 Ors v CUZ
DGMENT [Arbitration — Award — Recourse against award — Setting aside] Version No 1: 06 Feb 2023 (18:30 hrs) ii TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................1 THE APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE THE AWARD..........................
CHRISTIAN ALFRED LARPIN & Anor v KAIKHUSHRU SHIAVAX NARGOLWALA & Anor
For the submissions in the application, a brief summary of the claim and the defence to it is desirable. The pleadings are quite extensive, and the summary necessarily does not capture their detail. 5 Mr Larpin attended a viewing of the Villa on 25 or 26 October 2017, conducted by the Defendants
ER KOK YONG (YU GUORONG) v TAN CHENG CHENG (CHENG QINGQING) (AS CO-ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF SPENCER TUPPANI) & 2 Ors
by the Plaintiff on a “presumed resulting trust” for Spencer, and that the Plaintiff was consequently “now liable to account to the Defendants as personal representatives for the said monies or such amounts as may be due”.9 15 Further, the Defendants pleaded that in respect of those payments ma
SIM GUAN SENG & 2 Ors v ONE ORGANISATION LIMITED & 2 Ors
senior executive positions in several listed companies3 including Fraser & Neave, Limited and DBS Land Limited. He has also held office as a director in many other listed companies, including Raffles Holdings Limited, Ascott Holdings Limited, Yeo Hiap Seng Limited, Parkway Holdings Limited (now
CNZ v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
I dismissed the application with brief oral grounds. In essence, I held that a gag order is concerned with only the interests of the victims and never with the interests of the accused person. Even though the applicant purported to be acting in the victims’ best interests, he was, in truth, urgin
Hunan Xiangzhong Mining Group Limited v Oilive Pte Ltd
a preliminary meeting on 11 January 2021 and directed that the defendant arrange for all relevant correspondence, notices, procedural orders, directions and documents to be served on the plaintiff. The defendant (as claimant in the Arbitration) proceeded to file its memorial on 25 February 2021.
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v MOHAMMED LUTFI BIN HUSSIN
that the facts underlying the 2nd Charge and the Alternative 2nd Charge had been established (see the DT Report at [48]). The Respondent had a duty to personally verify with Naseeruddin that he was of full age, had legal capacity, and had accepted proprietorship, before signing the Version No 1:
NISHIKI HOLDINGS PTE LTD & 2 Ors v SANKATY EUROPEAN INVESTMENTS S.A.R.L & 2 Ors
l Investments Pte Ltd … Plaintiffs And (1) Sankaty European Investments S.A.R.L (2) Sajjad Ahmad Akhtar (3) Chin Sek Peng Michael … Defendants JUDGMENT [Agency] — [Principal] — [Holding out] [Companies] — [Directors] — [Duties] [Companies] — [Receiver and manager] — [Appointment] [Professions] —
The "Neptra Premier"
olin Ng & Partners) for the Plaintiffs; Haridass Ajaib and Augustine Liew (Haridass Ho & Partners) for the Defendants; Goh Kok Leong, Chan Leng Sun and Yu Siew Fun (Ang & Partners) for the Third Party Parties : — Admiralty and Shipping – Bills of lading – Bills of lading as document of title – Defen
HAN HUI HUI & 5 Ors v ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S CHAMBERS
ng Kwang Lawrence Simon Anthony Muhammad Faizal bin Mustafa … Applicants And Attorney-General’s Chambers … Respondent JUDGMENT [Administrative Law – Judicial review] Version No 1: 16 Jun 2022 (13:23 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..............................................................
SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL (SINGAPORE) PRIVATE LIMITED v BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS
its decision on whether to do so, at least until after BComm had determined that the presented documents were compliant. As it turned out, Westpac did not negotiate the LCs, presumably because BComm Tokyo subsequently rejected the documents as being non-compliant (see [12] below). In these circum
Xu Wei Dong v Midas Holdings Limited
BRIEF SUMMARY OF PARTIES’ CASES .................................................4 THE LIQUIDATOR’S CASE ................................................................................4 MAZARS SG’S CASE........................................................................................5 MAZARS
HENRY QUEK PENG HOCK v CHIA SWEE HUN
jointly by Henry and Chia (“Joint TD A/C”), between November 2020 to April 2021 $744,122.74 7 Moneys withdrawn from Henry’s POSB Account (“Henry’s POSB A/C”) in February 2021 $800,000 8 Moneys withdrawn from Henry’s UOB Account (“Henry’s UOB A/C”) on 16 and 24 February 2021 of $500,000 each
LOH SIANG PIOW @ LOH CHAN PEW v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
at the old Tampines Stadium (which has since been demolished). They were held either in the morning starting from about 9am to 10am, or in the evening starting at about 4pm to 5pm. They lasted about 1½ hours.7 7 Ms C says that the incidents in the first and second charges occurred on the second
MICHAEL JON HARDMAN & Anor v SAIS LIMITED & Anor
the title of “Head of Partnership”.9 The employee share grant scheme 7 Before they agreed to join the Sarment Group, both the plaintiffs were separately informed by Mr Quentin Chiarugi (“Mr Chiarugi”), the defendants’ Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), that there were plans for a public listing and,
TRITECH WATER TECHNOLOGIES PTE. LTD. & Anor v DUAN WEI
ritech Engineering & Testing (Singapore) Pte Ltd … Plaintiffs And (1) Duan Wei (2) Luo Zhuobiao … Defendants JUDGMENT [Tort — Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit] [Tort — Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation] [Tort — Negligence] [Intellectual Property — Law of confidence — Breach of co
The "MMM Diana" ex "Able Director"
Derek Tan (Rajah and Tann) for plaintiff; Oon Thian Seng (T S Oon and Bazul) for defendants Parties : — Civil Procedure – Judgments and orders – Procedure for setting aside default judgment obtained pursuant to "unless order" – Whether judge in chambers should hear appeal against default judgment ob
Lawrence Li See Kit v Debate Association (Singapore)
GMENT [Administrative Law — Natural justice — Breach of fair hearing rule] [Administrative Law — Natural justice — Breach of rule against bias] [Tort — Negligence — Breach of duty] [Tort — Rule in Wilkinson v Downton] [Unincorporated Associations and Trade Unions — Societies — Membership — Breach o