§

Latest articles

Singapore

Amrae Benchuan Trading Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Tan Te Teck Gregory [2006] SGHC 181

The court dismissed an undue preference claim, holding that such a transaction requires a subjective desire to improve a creditor's position in the event of liquidation. Since this specific intent was not proven, the claim failed.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

The "Emma Maersk" [2006] SGHC 180

The court held that the defendant was not negligent in the disembarkation process as the established practice was for the pilot boat to determine the height of the gangway, and the ship had followed the instructions given by the pilot boat.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Wong Keng Leong Rayney v Law Society of Singapore [2006] SGHC 179

An application for judicial review of an interlocutory decision by a Disciplinary Committee is premature and should generally be declined until the final determination of the disciplinary proceedings.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Ser Kim Koi v Metalform Asia Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 178

A director is not entitled to disclosure of documents covered by legal advice privilege, even if they are otherwise entitled to access company records under section 199 of the Companies Act, where the director is in a position of conflict with the company.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Koh Bee Choo v Choo Chai Huah [2006] SGHC 177

The court applied the broad-brush approach to the division of matrimonial assets under s 112 of the Women's Charter, noting that the wife's lack of direct contribution and the husband's financial liabilities were key factors.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Otto Systems Singapore Pte Ltd v Greenline-Onyx Envirotech Phils, Inc [2006] SGHC 176

A letter written by a party's solicitors during negotiations can constitute an acknowledgement of debt if it contains a clear admission of liability, even if the exact amount is disputed, provided the correspondence is not protected by without prejudice privilege.

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

Future Enterprises Pte Ltd v McDonald's Corp [2006] SGHC 175

The court held that the marks 'MacCoffee' and 'McCAFÉ' are visually, aurally and conceptually similar, and given the similarity of the goods, there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Husain Safdar Abidally v Shiraz Abidally Husain alias Shiraz Abidally Abdul Husain and Another [2006] SGHC 174

The High Court ruled that an agreement to distribute bank monies contrary to Muslim law was invalid. Because the siblings' agreement failed to account for legal constraints on the estate's corpus, the court ordered distribution strictly according to Muslim law rather than the letter of wishes.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

National Foods Ltd v Pars Ram Brothers (Pte) Ltd [2006] SGHC 173

The High Court dismissed National Foods Ltd's claims against Pars Ram Brothers, ruling the plaintiff failed to prove the ginger was of unsatisfactory quality. The court held that while a settlement agreement barred claims for specific defects, it did not cover issues like excessive ash content.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Chen Siew Hwee v Low Kee Guan (Wong Yong Yee, co-respondent) [2006] SGHC 172

The court held that shares acquired by a husband as a gift prior to marriage do not form part of the matrimonial pool under s 112(10) of the Women's Charter, as they were not substantially improved during the marriage and do not constitute a matrimonial home.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Abdul Jalil bin Ahmad bin Talib and Others v A Formation Construction Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 171

A compromise agreement entered into by a sole trustee is binding on the trust where the trustee had ostensible authority or where the defendant provided consideration for the compromise by forbearing to pursue a claim for damages.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Sudarsanan Margasagayam [2006] SGHC 170

The court found the complainant's testimony unreliable and implausible, failing to establish the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Rabiah Bee bte Mohamed Ibrahim v Salem Ibrahim [2006] SGHC 17

The court allowed an amendment to pleadings at a late stage of the trial because it was in the interests of justice to have all issues between the parties disposed of in one action, and the defendant was not unfairly prejudiced by the amendment.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Hin Hup Bus Service (a firm) v Tay Chwee Hiang and Another [2006] SGHC 169

A magistrate is functus officio after delivering a judgment and cannot issue a second judgment varying the first. Similar fact evidence is admissible in civil cases if it is logically probative and not oppressive.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Zam bin Abdul Rashid [2006] SGHC 168

A sentence of life imprisonment is justified for culpable homicide where the offence is grave, the offender is of unstable character likely to re-offend, and the consequences of such re-offending are specially injurious.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Law Society of Singapore v Chung Ting Fai [2006] SGHC 167

A solicitor who knowingly prepares a false affidavit for a client, even if not filed, commits misconduct unbefitting an advocate and solicitor under s 83(2)(h) of the Legal Profession Act.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Re Thor Beng Huat [2006] SGHC 166

The High Court has jurisdiction under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act to make restraint orders against a person prior to their conviction, provided the statutory requirements are met.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v NF [2006] SGHC 165

The court established that the starting point for category 2 rapes (involving vulnerable victims or abuse of trust) is 15 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Orient Centre Investments Ltd and Another v Societe Generale and Another [2006] SGHC 164

The court held that the plaintiffs were precluded by the parol evidence rule in s 94 of the Evidence Act from asserting oral representations that contradicted the express terms of the written agreements they had signed.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Meyer Erwin v Lerner Brian and Others [2006] SGHC 163

The court has discretion to order security for costs against a foreign plaintiff, but it is not an inflexible rule; the court must weigh all circumstances to determine if it is just to do so.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Ltd and Another v Next of kin of Narayasamy s/o Ramasamy, deceased [2006] SGHC 162

An accident arises out of employment when the exertion producing the accident is too great for the workman at the time, regardless of whether the exertion was ordinary or whether the workman had a pre-existing condition.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Kea Meng Kwang and Another v Merrill Lynch Investment Managers (Asia Pacific) Ltd and Others [2006] SGHC 161

The court held that it would not assist a plaintiff in obtaining evidence from abroad via a letter of request where the plaintiff had a more straightforward cause of action available against another party in that foreign jurisdiction, and where the evidence sought was not necessa

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Carrefour Singapore Pte Ltd v Leong Wai Kay [2006] SGHC 160

The imposition of a criminal penalty under s 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not bar a principal from recovering the amount of the bribe as a civil debt under s 14(1) of the Act.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Ho Wing On Christopher and Others v ECRC Land Pte Ltd (in liquidation) [2006] SGHC 16

A liquidator who brings an action on behalf of an insolvent company is not personally liable for costs incurred by the winning party simply because the company has insufficient assets, unless there is evidence of impropriety or misconduct.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read