LITT
Try LITT free
Public Prosecutor v Teo Hwee Peng and other appeals [2025] SGHC 69
The decision in [2025] SGHC 69 represents a significant appellate intervention regarding the integrity of law enforcement officers and the boundaries of "informant management" as a defense against corruption charges. The case involves Teo Hwee Peng ("Teo"), a Checkpoints Inspecto
White Oak Trade Finance Assetco 1, LLC v Rhodium International Trading USA, Inc [2025] SGHC 68
The court dismissed an application for the appointment of an additional liquidator, finding that the appointment was sought solely to facilitate a deposition in US proceedings rather than to further the liquidation process.
Re King & Wood Mallesons and other matters [2025] SGHC 67
The court confirmed that the PRC reorganisation proceedings qualified as a 'foreign main proceeding' under the UNCITRAL Model Law, as the debtor's COMI was in the PRC, and granted the requested relief.
Vikramathithan a/l Rasu v AK Equine Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 65
The court has discretion under s 344G(3) of the Companies Act 1967 to grant a limitation direction to exclude a period of time from the limitation period when restoring a struck-off company to the Register, provided the causative and just requirements are satisfied.
Ren Xin Wu v Lee Kuan Fung and another and another matter [2025] SGHC 63
The judgment in Ren Xin Wu v Lee Kuan Fung and another and another matter [2025] SGHC 63 represents a significant clarification of the boundaries of directors' duties during periods of financial distress and the high evidentiary threshold required to establish "sham" transactions
Public Prosecutor v Foo Li Ping and another matter [2025] SGHC 60
The court established sentencing principles for the offence of allowing the death of a child under s 304C of the Penal Code, emphasizing that culpability is assessed based on the offender's awareness of the risk of grievous hurt and their failure to protect the victim.
Re Dasin Retail Trust Management Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 6
A trustee-manager of a business trust is a 'company' within the meaning of Part 5 of the IRDA and may apply for a moratorium under s 64 of the IRDA in respect of liabilities incurred in its capacity as trustee-manager.
DJY v DJZ and another [2025] SGHC 59
The test for an Erinford injunction involves a balancing exercise of the prejudice caused to parties, in addition to considering the likelihood of success on appeal and whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory.
Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port and Terminal Pte Ltd & Others [2025] SGHC 58
The court held that conveyances made with the intent to defraud creditors are voidable under s 73B of the CLPA, and that sham transactions where parties do not intend to create the legal relations they appear to create are void.
Wong Joo Wan (as liquidator of Envy Hospitality Holdings Pte Ltd (in members’ voluntary liquidation)) v Lim Siong Heng Raymond and another [2025] SGHC 52
The court affirmed the liquidator's rejection of a creditor's proof of debt and admission of another creditor's proof of debt, finding that the liquidator's decisions were correct and that the application was of advantage to the liquidation.
Aastar Trading Pte Ltd v Olam Global Agri Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 5
The court may adjourn enforcement proceedings under s 31(5) of the IAA pending the outcome of setting aside proceedings in the seat court if it is proper to do so, balancing factors such as the bona fides of the challenge, the merits of the challenge, the risk of dissipation of a
Re Compuage Infocom Ltd and another [2025] SGHC 49
The court held that the Indian Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) qualifies as a 'foreign proceeding' under the UNCITRAL Model Law, and the Resolution Professional is a 'foreign representative'. The court granted recognition but declined to grant immediate relief for
Sun Yongjian and another v Goh Seng Heng [2025] SGHC 47
The court held that while the defendant established a prima facie defence, the inordinate and inexcusable delay in applying to set aside the default judgment, combined with the prejudice to the claimants that could not be remedied by costs, justified the court's refusal to exerci
Law Society of Singapore v Chen Kok Siang Joseph and another matter [2025] SGHC 44
A solicitor who engages in dishonest conduct, prefers their own interests over their client's, and fails to supervise staff in a way that allows for the unauthorized practice of law, is unfit to remain on the roll of advocates and solicitors.
Zhong Renhai and others v Goh Sock Ngee and others [2025] SGHC 43
A worldwide freezing order (WFO) and proprietary injunction (PI) may be upheld where the claimant establishes a good arguable case and a real risk of dissipation, supported by evidence of dishonesty, and where the balance of convenience favours the injunction.
Ang Tien Sin v Lai Kin Sin and others [2025] SGHC 42
The court held that the removal of a director under Article 74 of the Company's Articles of Association at a General Meeting requires only an ordinary resolution, not a special resolution.
Hayate Partners Pte Ltd v Rajan Sunil Kumar [2025] SGHC 41
The court held that an employee breached contractual and equitable obligations of confidence by retaining confidential information after employment termination, despite the absence of express contractual prohibitions against accessing or downloading such information for non-work
Shipworks Engineering Pte Ltd and another v Sembcorp Marine Integrated Yard Pte Ltd and another and other suits [2025] SGHC 40
The court determined the quantum of damages owed between parties following a previous judgment, resolving disputes over timesheet validity, administrative charges, and specific work order claims.
Glassberg, Jonathan William v UBS AG, Singapore Branch [2025] SGHC 4
The court held that the defendant bank did not owe a contractual or tortious duty of care to the plaintiff regarding an investment recommended by a relationship manager, as the manager lacked actual or ostensible authority and the bank's terms expressly disclaimed such liability.
Java Asset Holding Ltd v Sin David [2025] SGHC 39
The court held that the 'serious possibility' threshold for an expedited bankruptcy application under s 314 IRDA is lower than the 'real risk' threshold for a Mareva injunction, and that the test is objective based on facts reasonably known to the creditor.
DMZ v DNA [2025] SGHC 31
The court has no jurisdiction to review the Registrar's administrative decisions in an arbitration, and the Registrar has the power to review and reconsider his own administrative decisions.
SME Resources Pte Ltd v Koh Xiankai (Goh Chye Guan, third party) and another matter [2025] SGHC 30
Claims for breach of fiduciary duty are subject to a six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act, and the doctrine of separate legal personality means a company can sue its sole beneficial owner for removing its assets.
DLV and another v DLX and others [2025] SGHC 29
An arbitral award will not be set aside on the ground that the tribunal failed to apply its mind to an essential issue unless such failure is a clear and virtually inescapable inference from the award.
India Glycols Ltd and others v Texan Minerals and Chemicals LLC [2025] SGHC 28
An arbitral award may be set aside under Art 34(2)(a)(iii) of the Model Law if the tribunal decides matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration, such as imposing liability on parties who were not signatories to the contract breached.