LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v S [2003] SGHC 70

The court held that a juvenile offender who commits serious sexual offences against siblings while in a position of trust should be sentenced to imprisonment rather than sent to a home.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Wu Si Yuan v Public Prosecutor [2003] SGHC 7

Probation is not granted as of right to young offenders; the court must consider all circumstances, including the likelihood of success of the rehabilitation, and if the circumstances do not afford a realistic opportunity for rehabilitation, a prison sentence is appropriate.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Samwoh Resources Pte Ltd v Lee Ah Poh [2003] SGHC 69

A person is liable in the tort of deceit if they knowingly or recklessly make a false statement to another with the intent that it be acted upon, and the other party acts upon it and suffers damage.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Sim Yak Song and Others v Lim Chang and Another [2003] SGHC 68

A retiring partner has no right to control or interfere with specific partnership assets, as they are merely an unsecured creditor entitled to the value of their share.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Nasser Bin Salleh [2003] SGHC 66

The court held that in sentencing for an offence under s 304(a) of the Penal Code, the court must find a range within the limits prescribed under that section, and the fact that the case might have been charged under s 304(b) is irrelevant.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Anwar Siraj and Another v Ting Kang Chung and Another [2003] SGHC 64

The court held that an arbitrator should only be removed for misconduct if there is an objective real likelihood of bias or incompetence amounting to a substantial miscarriage of justice, and that a subjective lack of confidence by a party is insufficient.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Ng Heng Liat and Others v Kiyue Co Ltd and Another [2003] SGHC 62

The rule in Foss v Harbottle applies to counterclaims with equal force as it does to claims, meaning a shareholder cannot bring a derivative counterclaim without obtaining leave of court under s 216A of the Companies Act.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Yeo Gek Hong [2003] SGHC 61

The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt due to material inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and the inconclusive nature of the medical evidence.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Yen May Woen [2003] SGHC 60

The court held that the prosecution is not required to call every witness who handled an exhibit unless a reasonable doubt as to the identity of the exhibit has arisen.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Digital Dispatch (ITL) Pte Ltd v Citycab Pte Ltd [2003] SGHC 6

Leave to appeal against an arbitrator's decision on a 'one-off' contract clause should only be granted if the construction is obviously wrong.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Ng Sing King and Others v PSA International Pte Ltd and Others [2003] SGHC 59

The court held that it is an abuse of process to join a non-member or non-shareholder in a section 216 Companies Act action where no remedy is sought against them.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Lim Ek Kian v Public Prosecutor [2003] SGHC 58

An appellate court should be slow to disturb a trial judge’s finding of fact on the credibility of a witness, especially when based on demeanour. Forgery for the purpose of cheating is a serious offence, and a 12-month imprisonment sentence is an appropriate benchmark.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Re G (custody of an infant) [2003] SGHC 57

The court's paramount consideration in custody and access disputes is the welfare of the infant, and the court may vary previous orders if it is in the child's best interests.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Trans-World (Aluminium) Ltd v Cornelder China (Singapore) [2003] SGHC 56

The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation by the defendants, as the defendants did not make the alleged representations and there was no reliance by the plaintiffs on any such representations in entering the contract.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Re De Lacy Richard QC [2003] SGHC 55

The court held that the first-stage test for the admission of a Queen's Counsel (whether the case is of sufficient difficulty and complexity) cannot be re-argued in a subsequent application without a material change in the facts.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Rahman Pachan Pillai Prasana v Public Prosecutor [2003] SGHC 52

The fact that an offender made no financial gain or caused no financial loss to another from the crime of fabricating false evidence is a legitimate mitigating factor but of very little weight, as the true victim is the course of justice itself.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Sincere Watch Limited v Bakery Mart Pte Ltd [2003] SGHC 50

The court held that where restructuring discussions stopped short of agreed terms and an executed agreement, the defendant should not have unconditional leave to defend a summary judgment application.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Tay Chi Hiong v Public Prosecutor [2003] SGHC 5

An appellate court will not overturn findings of fact unless they are against the weight of evidence, and minor inconsistencies in witness testimony do not necessarily undermine the evidence on key issues.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Yuong Cheong Construction Pte Ltd v Shimizu Corporation [2003] SGHC 48

The occupier's liability under the Factories Act is strict, but the Act allows the occupier to shift liability to a third party if the third party is proven to be the actual offender. The criminal liability of the third party does not depend on the occupier's ability to prove due

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Chuah Gin Synn v Public Prosecutor [2003] SGHC 47

The High Court in its appellate jurisdiction has the power to correct non-clerical mistakes in its judgment before the court rises for the day, applying the same powers as subordinate courts under s 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Jaykumaran s/o Saminathan Retinam [2003] SGHC 45

The High Court quashed the conviction of the accused in a criminal revision because the prosecution failed to call a material witness, and the victim's evidence was unreliable.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Tan Chun Seng [2003] SGHC 44

The court held that the defence of grave and sudden provocation under Exception 1 to s 300 of the Penal Code was not made out as the provocation did not emanate from the deceased in a manner that could be considered grave and sudden.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Bayerische Landesbank Girozentrale v Khaw Hock Seang [2003] SGHC 42

The burden of proving a forgery lies on the person asserting it and the burden of proving a forgery is more onerous than the ordinary standard required in civil cases.

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

Publicis Group SA v Chong Hon Kuan Ivan [2003] SGHC 41

An originating summons is not an appropriate process where there is a dispute regarding essential facts which cannot be resolved on the basis of affidavits; in such cases, the court may order the proceedings to continue as if they had been begun by writ.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read