LITT
Try LITT free
The “Ambassador” [2023] SGHC 2
A mortgagee is entitled to elect to enforce its remedies against the proceeds of sale of a vessel, and is not required to first exhaust other security provided by the defendant, provided there is no double recovery.
ByBit Fintech Ltd v Ho Kai Xin and others [2023] SGHC 199
USDT is a chose in action and is property capable of being held on trust.
ONGC Petro additions Ltd v DL E&C Co, Ltd (formerly known as Daelim Industrial Co Ltd) [2023] SGHC 197
An arbitral tribunal does not act in excess of jurisdiction by revisiting issues in a quantum phase that were not conclusively determined in a bifurcated liability award, and a tribunal's reasoning based on evidence and arguments presented during the proceedings does not breach n
Lau Sheng Jan Alistair v Lau Cheok Joo Richard and another [2023] SGHC 196
The court held that the Trust Deed was not a sham and was not unenforceable for illegality, thus allowing the sole beneficiary to terminate the trust under the rule in Saunders v Vautier.
Tey Leng Yen v Mai Xun Yao [2023] SGHC 194
The court held that permission to appeal against a costs order will only be granted if the applicant demonstrates a prima facie case of error, a question of general principle decided for the first time, or a question of importance, and that the applicant failed to meet this thres
Hon G v Tan Pei Li [2023] SGHC 193
Permission to appeal against a District Judge's decision is refused where the applicant fails to demonstrate a prima facie case of error or a question of general principle decided for the first time.
The National University of Singapore v Ten Leu Jiun Jeanne-Marie [2023] SGHC 191
The court granted an extended civil restraint order (ECRO) against the defendant for persistently commencing actions and applications that were totally without merit, specifically regarding her repeated attempts to relitigate a judgment obtained against her by the claimant.
Re Kirkham International Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) [2023] SGHC 19
The court has no power to retrospectively authorise the appointment of a solicitor by a liquidator under s 144(1) of the IRDA, as the statute requires authorisation to be obtained prior to the appointment.
Foo Kok Boon v Ngow Kheong Shen and others and another matter [2023] SGHC 189
The court held that the doctrine of prospective overruling applies to the decision in Salmizan, meaning it does not apply to interlocutory judgments entered before 30 March 2023.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Teck Leong Melvin [2023] SGHC 188
The court established a sentencing framework for fraudulent evasion of GST under s 128D of the Customs Act, using a regressive multiplier based on the amount of GST evaded, and provided a framework for default imprisonment terms.
JP Nelson Equipment Pte Ltd v Builders Hub Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 186
The court may set aside an adjudication determination on the ground of fraud if the fraud is proven, even if the strict two-step test in Facade Solution is not fully met, as fraud unravels everything.
DAY v DAZ [2023] SGHC 185
A dispute over whether a specific dispute resolution mechanism (ST 3.3 and 3.4) applies to a particular matter is not itself a dispute 'subject to' that mechanism, and therefore falls within the scope of the general arbitration agreement (GT 14).
Sakthivel Sivasurian v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 184
The High Court's revisionary powers can be exercised over a State Court's decision to deny bail, provided the threshold of 'serious injustice' is met. The court has the power under s 103(4) of the CPC to revoke bail if the accused has breached bail conditions, and this power is n
Deniyal bin Kamis v Mapo Engineering Pte Ltd and others [2023] SGHC 183
The judgment in Deniyal bin Kamis v Mapo Engineering Pte Ltd and others [2023] SGHC 183 represents a significant exploration of the boundaries of minority oppression under Section 216 of the Companies Act 1967 , particularly within the context of closely-held private companies ma
Public Prosecutor v Affandi bin Mohamed Hassan [2023] SGHC 182
The accused was convicted of drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act after failing to rebut the presumption of trafficking and failing to prove the courier defence on a balance of probabilities.
Niranjan s/o Muthupalani v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 181
The court affirmed that deterrence remains the dominant sentencing consideration for serious violent offences, even where an offender has a mental disorder, if the nature and gravity of the offence are sufficiently severe. It also established a revised sentencing framework for s
Tham Saik Mun Simon v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 179
The court held that the statutory assumption in s 71A(1) of the Road Traffic Act is only rebuttable by the exception in s 71A(2), and the appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that his breath alcohol level would not have exceeded the prescribed limit but for his
Cova Group Holdings Ltd v Advanced Submarine Networks Pte Ltd and another [2023] SGHC 178
The court held that security for costs may be ordered against a foreign claimant even if there is an overlap between the defence and counterclaim, provided that the counterclaim does not have an independent vitality of its own and the order does not confer an unjust advantage.
Fu Zhihui Alvin and another v Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority [2023] SGHC 177
The court held that a director who applied to strike off a company has locus standi to apply for its restoration, and that restoration is just where it confers a practicable benefit such as time and cost savings for future investments.
Kottakki Srinivas Patnaik v Attorney-General [2023] SGHC 174
The court held that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case of reasonable suspicion that the Attorney-General's prosecutorial discretion was exercised in breach of Art 12(1) or Art 35(8) of the Constitution.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Yi Rui Tristan [2023] SGHC 173
The court held that the accused was guilty of trafficking in methamphetamine, as the evidence established his possession, knowledge, and intention to traffic, and the defence failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.
Haw Wan Sin David and another v Kwek Siang Ling Wendy and others [2023] SGHC 171
In Haw Wan Sin David and another v Kwek Siang Ling Wendy and others [2023] SGHC 171 , the General Division of the High Court addressed a complex multi-party dispute arising from failed property investments in Brazil. The Plaintiffs, David Haw Wan Sin and Cindy Yee Ai Moi, sought
Public Prosecutor v Yogesswaran C Manogaran and another [2023] SGHC 170
The court held that the chain of custody for the drug exhibits was unbroken despite minor weight discrepancies and the lack of accused presence during press release photography. The court also rejected the accused's knowledge and consumption defences as inherently incredible and
Compass Consulting Pte Ltd v Lim Siau Hing (alias Lim Kim Hoe) and another [2023] SGHC 17
The court held that the agreement between the parties was contained in Document 1 and Document 2, and that the $30m condition was not part of the agreement. The court also found that the agreement was not tainted by illegality under the Securities and Futures Act.