LITT
Try LITT free
MBF Northern Securities Sdn Bhd v Purwadi [2025] SGHC 184
A stay of enforcement of a foreign judgment pending an impeachment application in the foreign jurisdiction may be granted if the applicant establishes special circumstances, such as the insolvency of the judgment creditor, and the court may impose conditions to balance the intere
The “Ocean Goby” and another matter [2025] SGHC 183
The court dismissed an application for a case management stay of payment out applications, finding no real risk of overlapping issues where the applicant's underlying claim had already been determined by the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Terrence Fernandez v Tan Aik Hong Thomas [2025] SGHC 169
The District Court has jurisdiction to hear a claim if the claimant abandons the excess amount above the jurisdictional limit of $250,000, and such abandonment can be implied if the claim was not quantified in the Statement of Claim.
Yeo Xueli Celeste v Sin David and another [2025] SGHC 166
The court held that the claimant failed to establish a reasonable cause of action for dishonest assistance and conspiracy against the second defendant, as the pleaded facts did not support the existence of fiduciary duties or the requisite knowledge for dishonesty.
Compania De Navegacion Palomar SA and others v Ernest Ferdinand Perez De La Sala and another suit and another matter [2025] SGHC 153
The Singapore High Court clarified that the Riddick principle applies only to disclosures made under compulsion. When documents are produced to resist interlocutory applications, courts must examine the context to determine if the disclosure was voluntary or compelled.
DNQ v DNR [2025] SGHC 152
In DNQ v DNR, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Mareva injunctions, Civil Procedure — Pleadings.
Straco Leisure Pte Ltd v Sumitomo (Shi) Cyclo Drive Asia Pacific Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 150
The Singapore High Court ruled that reconditioning works were authorized, but held that the defendant's standard terms were not incorporated into the contract due to vague language, emphasizing strict requirements for incorporation by reference in commercial agreements.
Re Singapore Medical Council [2025] SGHC 148
The court granted an extension of time for the Complaints Committee to complete its inquiry under s 45(4) of the MRA, but emphasised that such applications are judicial in nature and require sufficient evidence and timely filing.
Hertel Singapore Pte Ltd (now known as Altrad Services Singapore Pte Ltd) and another v Cheng Swee Guan and others [2025] SGHC 138
The High Court dismissed an appeal against an Assistant Registrar's decision to grant permission for Further and Better Particulars. The court ruled that procedural irregularities do not warrant setting aside an order unless substantial injustice is proven, affirming judicial autonomy in case manage
Madison Pacific Trust Ltd and others v David Salim and another [2025] SGHC 128
Case Details * Citation: [2025] SGHC 128 * Case Number: Originating Application No 891 of 2023 (Summons No 1067 of 2025) * Decision Date: 7 July 2025 * Court: General Division of the High Court of
Lee Say Yng v Lee Cheng Mui [2025] SGHC 126
The court held that a co-owner commits trespass by ouster when their conduct, objectively viewed, unequivocally denies the other co-owner's title or effectively prevents them from residing in the property.
Foo Diana v Woo Mui Chan [2025] SGHC 125
Where a claim is commenced in the High Court but the damages awarded fall within the jurisdiction of the State Courts, the general practice is to award costs on the applicable State Courts scale unless sufficient reason is shown to justify the High Court scale.
Banner (China) Investment Co Ltd v Ang Tjun Min Jimmy [2025] SGHC 12
The court has the power to direct the process for obtaining signature specimens for handwriting analysis, and a party does not have an absolute right to select the specimens to be used.
Tan Tse Haw v Peh Tian Swee and another [2025] SGHC 113
The court held that for the purposes of an unless order, the 'plain and obvious' test applies to determine if a party has complied with a production order. The court cannot resolve disputes as to the sufficiency of discovery based on contentious affidavits at an interlocutory sta
Tan Tse Haw v Peh Tian Swee and another [2025] SGHCR 9
In Tan Tse Haw v Peh Tian Swee [2025] SGHCR 9, the court granted an unless order against the Respondent for persistent discovery failures. The ruling mandates compliance within 21 days, failing which the Respondent's pleadings will be struck out and judgment entered for the Applicant.
Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 4348 v Hoi Hup Sunway Pasir Ris Pte Ltd and others [2025] SGHCR 5
An extension of time to file an application for summary determination under O 14 r 12 of the Rules of Court 2014 will be refused where the applicant fails to show good cause for the delay and has not proceeded diligently in the conduct of the action.
Exterian Capital Pte Ltd v Wong Jun Jie Adrian and another [2025] SGHCR 40
The court allowed an amendment to the Defence where the defendant sought to align his pleadings with new evidence that emerged after the initial Defence was filed, despite the defendant's previous failure to comply with disclosure obligations.
Sree Ram Construction Pte Ltd v Green Tag Scaffolding Pte Ltd and another [2025] SGHCR 39
The Rules of Court 2021 do not mandate that a defendant must bring all claims against a claimant as a counterclaim in the existing action; they enable but do not compel a defendant to do so.
GHP Far East Ltd v NPG Global Pte Ltd and another [2025] SGHCR 37
The court's discretion under O 9 rr 4(1) and 4(2) of the ROC 2021 to give judgment or dismiss an action is only enlivened if the defaulting party is absent from the most recent Registrar's Case Conference convened by the court.
UBS Switzerland AG v Koch Shipping Pte Ltd and another [2025] SGHCR 34
The court held that Switzerland was the clearly more appropriate forum for the dispute under the forum non conveniens analysis, as the key witnesses were resident in Switzerland and Swiss law governed the underlying security agreements.
Tajudin bin Gulam Rasul and another v Suriaya bte Haja Mohideen [2025] SGHCR 33
The court has the inherent power to impose personal costs on advocates and solicitors who cite fictitious AI-generated authorities, as this constitutes improper, unreasonable, or negligent conduct that causes unnecessary costs to the counterparty.
Wesley Widjaja v Ng Wei San (alias Oei Wei San alias Wilson Hasan Widjaja) and others [2025] SGHCR 32
A party asserting legal professional privilege over documents ordered to be produced must provide sufficient factual basis on affidavit to establish the preconditions for the privilege, as a bare assertion is insufficient.
The “Hong Chang Sheng” [2025] SGHCR 31
The court held that consent orders are contractual in nature if they reflect a consensus ad idem, and the court has no residual discretion to interfere with such orders unless there are vitiating factors under contract law.
JPL Industries Pte Ltd v Lanka Marine Services Pte Ltd [2025] SGHCR 30
In JPL Industries Pte Ltd v Lanka Marine Services Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Judgments and orders, Equity — Defences.