LITT
Try LITT free
Mirifa v Mahur [2023] DIFC ARB 009: The High Cost of Asset Concealment and the Limits of Procedural Duplication
How the DIFC Courts are tightening the screws on recalcitrant debtors in USD 1.6 billion enforcement battles. On 21 August 2025, H.E.
Ohtli v Onora [2026] DIFC ARB 034: The High Cost of Procedural Overreach in Anti-Suit Injunctions
How the DIFC Courts are using costs assessments to police the boundaries of anti-suit litigation On March 24, 2026, H.E.
Nalani v Netty [2025] DIFC ARB 027: The High Cost of Procedural Obstruction in Enforcement Proceedings
How H.E. Justice Shamlan Al Sawalehi’s latest costs order signals a hardening stance against meritless jurisdictional challenges in the DIFC. On 2 October 2025, H.E.
United Overseas Bank Ltd v Lippo Marina Collection Pte Ltd and others [2025] SGHC 232
The court held that damages for conspiracy should be assessed on the basis of the actual purchase price (APP) loans basis, and that statutory interest is only payable on the net sum of damages after deductions for mitigation failures.
True Yoga Pte Ltd and others v Wee Ewe Seng Patrick John [2024] SGHC 228
The court held that in a non-custodial breach of fiduciary duty, the fiduciary bears the legal burden of proving that the claimant would have suffered the loss despite the breach. The court adopted the Historical Benchmark for quantifying damages.
TOWA Corp v ASMPT Singapore Pte Ltd and another appeal [2024] SGCA 52
The court held that 'general additional costs of sales' which are unclassified and apply to the whole product range should be proportionally allocated to the infringing product line, as it is reasonable to infer these costs increase with sales.
Lang Ren Jee Renata Mrs Tay Ren Jee Renata v Toh Yih Wei [2023] SGHC 147
A defendant cannot challenge the issue of causation at the assessment of damages stage if interlocutory judgment has already been entered.
Mei Yue Lan Margaret v Raffles City (Pte) Ltd [2005] SGHC 168
The court assessed damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities for a plaintiff suffering from Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD) following a leg injury, determining that while the injury was not life-threatening, the pain and suffering were severe and warranted a global awa
Chew Poh Kwan Margaret v Toh Hong Guan and Another [2004] SGHC 280
The court assessed damages for whiplash, headaches, depression, and meralgia parasthetica, and awarded damages for loss of earning capacity due to the plaintiff's reduced productivity.
Ho Yiu v Lim Peng Seng [2004] SGHC 218
The court varied the assessment of damages for loss of earnings and future medical expenses, adjusting the multiplier for future earnings to 15 years and re-evaluating the multiplicands based on the plaintiff's specific role and economic conditions.
Rajendran a/l Palany v Drill-Quip Asia Pacific Pte Ltd [2004] SGHC 100
The court held that an award for future medication was warranted for backache, but upheld the assistant registrar's decision to deny damages for loss of future earnings due to the appellant's malingering.
WEN HANRONG v HUATIONG CONTRACTOR PTE LTD & Anor
The court assessed damages for personal injuries sustained in a traffic accident, rejecting claims for heart and lung complications due to lack of causal link, and provided guidance on the conduct of counsel in assessment proceedings.