§

Latest articles

Singapore

Wah Heng Glass Holdings Pte Ltd v Diethelm Keller Engineering Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 29

The court held that the plaintiff had proven the existence of the contracts and the defendant failed to prove its counterclaims for defective work and material due to lack of evidence.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Emjay Enterprises Pte Ltd v Skylift Consolidator (Pte) Ltd (Direct Services (HK) Ltd, Third Party) [2006] SGHC 28

A limitation of liability clause relates to liability rather than the quantum of damages, and therefore must be specifically pleaded in accordance with the Rules of Court.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Silberline Asia Pacific Inc v Lim Yong Wah Allan and Others [2006] SGHC 27

A stay of execution of a summary judgment pending the trial of a counterclaim is discretionary and requires a sufficient connection between the claim and the counterclaim, as well as a plausible counterclaim.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Sin Leng Industries Pte Ltd v Ong Chai Teck and Others [2006] SGHC 25

An application to amend pleadings in the middle of a trial will be refused if it introduces a new case that causes prejudice to the other party which cannot be compensated by costs, especially when the party seeking the amendment has been negligent in the conduct of its litigatio

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

The Vasiliy Golovnin [2006] SGHC 247

In The Vasiliy Golovnin [2006] SGHC 247, the High Court set aside a warrant of arrest due to a lack of full and frank disclosure. However, the Court denied the defendant's claim for damages, ruling that the plaintiffs acted without mala fides or gross negligence in their application.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Geowin Construction Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Management Corporation Strata Title No 1256 [2006] SGHC 245

An expert's decision is binding on the parties as a matter of contract, and the court will not intervene to set it aside in the absence of fraud, collusion, or a material breach of the expert's terms of appointment.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Wee Yue Chew v Su Sh-Hsyu [2006] SGHC 244

In an application to set aside a judgment obtained in the absence of a party at trial, the most important consideration is the reason for the party's absence. Unless the absence was due to accident or mistake rather than being deliberate, the court is unlikely to allow a rehearin

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Beckkett Pte Ltd v Deutsche Bank AG and Another [2006] SGHC 243

The court allowed the plaintiff to amend its pleadings during the trial because the delay was not substantial and did not cause prejudice to the defendant, and the amendments were sufficiently clear to be understood.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Compact Metal Industries Ltd v PPG Industries (Singapore) Ltd [2006] SGHC 242

The court held that the defendant was in breach of the implied conditions of satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act, as the paint supplied was inherently incapable of producing a consistent finish.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Johnson & Johnson v Uni-Charm Kabushiki Kaisha (Uni-Charm Corp) [2006] SGHC 241

The Singapore High Court allowed Johnson & Johnson's appeal, overturning the Registrar's decision to block the registration of the 'Careree' mark. The Court ruled the mark was confusingly similar to 'Carefree' and constituted passing off under the Trade Marks Act, awarding costs to the appellant.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Firstlink Energy Pte Ltd v Creanovate Pte Ltd and Another Action [2006] SGHC 240

The court held that the term 'loan' in sections 162 and 163 of the Companies Act includes 'advances', and that directors who breach their fiduciary duties are liable to make restitution to the company.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Siti Hajar bte Abdullah v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGHC 24

A 'special reason' for exemption from mandatory disqualification under s 3(3) of the MVA must be a mitigating or extenuating circumstance directly connected with the commission of the offence, not merely a circumstance peculiar to the offender.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Nautical Concept Pte Ltd v Jeffery Mark Richard and Another [2006] SGHC 239

An application for a trade mark is made in bad faith if it involves dealings that fall short of standards of acceptable commercial behaviour, even if the marks are not identical or confusingly similar.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Smith & Associates Far East Ltd v Britestone Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 238

A buyer can recover damages from a seller for a settlement paid to a third party in a chain of contracts if the damages were within the reasonable contemplation of the parties at the time of the contract.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Poh Kwee Eng v Hua Goi Co. (Pte) Ltd [2006] SGHC 235

In Poh Kwee Eng v Hua Goi Co. (Pte) Ltd [2006] SGHC 235, the High Court held the employer liable for workplace injuries caused by an unsafe hoisting system. The court awarded the plaintiff interlocutory judgment and 85% of costs, emphasizing the employer's non-delegable duty to ensure equipment safe

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd and Another (First Currency Choice Pte Ltd, Third Party) [2006] SGHC 233

In Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v UOB [2006] SGHC 233, the High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, confirming patent validity and infringement. The court denied a grace period for the defendants, emphasizing that relying on third-party indemnities does not negate knowledge of infringement.

Sushant Shukla· ·9 min read
Singapore

Ng Geok Eng v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGHC 232

Market rigging and false trading offences under s 197(1) SFA should attract custodial sentences in appropriate cases to deter market manipulation, and the sentencing approach for unauthorised share trading under s 201(b) SFA should distinguish between cases involving deception of

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Abdul Aziz bin Mohamed Yatim v Rubiah bte Rahmat [2006] SGHC 231

Civil contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature and personal to the alleged contemnor; therefore, they abate upon the death of the alleged contemnor and cannot be continued against their personal representative.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Lock Yeng Fun (mw) v Chua Hock Chye [2006] SGHC 230

The court held that in a long marriage where the wife's financial contributions were minimal but she performed the role of homemaker, an award of 40% of the matrimonial assets was just and equitable.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Gan Too Cheh v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGHC 23

Findings of fact by a trial judge based on the credibility of witnesses should not be overturned unless they are plainly wrong or against the weight of the evidence.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency [2006] SGHC 229

The court held that the defendant, as the superintending officer, did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff (the main contractor) for pure economic loss in the context of a building contract where the plaintiff had other contractual remedies against the employer.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Navaseelan Balasingam v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGHC 228

The court held that the totality principle should not be applied in a way that unduly constrains the aggregate sentence when multiple distinct offences are committed, and that imprisonment sentences may be backdated to the date of arrest.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Terence Yeo Guan Chye and Another v Lau Siew Kim [2006] SGHC 227

The court held that amendments to pleadings on the last day of trial may be granted if any resulting prejudice to the opposing party can be compensated by costs.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Choi Guo Hong Edward [2006] SGHC 226

In Public Prosecutor v Choi Guo Hong Edward, the High Court affirmed that abettors of unlicensed moneylending are subject to the same enhanced sentencing tiers as principal offenders under the Moneylenders Act, resulting in a total of eight months' imprisonment for the respondent.

Sushant Shukla· ·9 min read