LITT
Try LITT free
City Spark (Singapore) Pte Ltd v The Outdoor Recreation Group, LLC and another [2025] SGHC 25
The court held that Singapore was the appropriate forum for the defamation claim as the key witness was based in Singapore and the governing law was Singapore law.
Le Ninh Tien v Rainbow Forest Enterprises Ltd and others [2025] SGHC 240
The court affirmed that the burden lies on the applicant to show that a foreign forum is distinctly more appropriate than Singapore in a forum non conveniens application, and that procedural convenience, while a relevant factor, does not override substantial jurisdictional ties.
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
Protrade Steel Co Ltd v Aussins Overseas Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 147
A non-exclusive jurisdiction clause in a standard-form contract carries less weight in a forum non conveniens analysis, and the governing law being a foreign law is insufficient on its own to support a stay.
Xiamen Tonghin Furniture Industries Co Pte Ltd v Goh Heng Tee [2025] SGHCR 36
The court held that the defendant failed to show a fair and reasonable possibility that he was not properly served with process by the foreign court, and thus there was no breach of natural justice to prevent recognition of the foreign judgment.
Powercom Co, Ltd v Sunpower Semiconductor Ltd [2024] SGHC 89
A foreign judgment is final and conclusive for the purposes of enforcement in Singapore only when the appeals process in the foreign jurisdiction has been exhausted, if the losing party has exercised its right to appeal.
Finaport Pte Ltd v Techteryx Ltd [2024] SGHC 329
The court dismissed an application for an anti-suit injunction, holding that the foreign proceedings were not vexatious or oppressive and were not commenced in breach of contract, as the applicant was not a party to the contract containing the dispute resolution clause.
Cheong Jun Yoong v Three Arrows Capital Ltd and others [2024] SGHC 21
The Singapore High Court dismissed an application to stay proceedings in Cheong Jun Yoong v Three Arrows Capital Ltd, ruling that Singapore is the appropriate forum. The court affirmed that a trust claim over assets can proceed despite foreign liquidation, prioritizing commercial reality over struct
DGX v DGY [2024] SGHC 17
In DGX v DGY, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Conflict of Laws — Foreign judgment, Statutory Interpretation — Construction of statute.
Gonzalo Gil White v Oro Negro Drilling Pte Ltd and others [2024] SGCA 9
The court held that there was no identity of issues between the Singapore proceedings and the Mexican insolvency proceedings, and that judicial comity could not be applied to deny a permanent injunction where the foreign decisions were procured in breach of the court's own interi
Nicholas Eng Teng Cheng v Government of the City of Buenos Aires [2024] SGCA 15
The law of incorporation (lex incorporationis) is the governing law for the lifting of a company's corporate veil, as it is inextricably linked to the company's separate legal personality.
Tan Wei Heng Kelvin and another v Tok Beng Tong and another [2023] SGHC 352
The court held that Malaysia was the more appropriate forum for the trial of the action, as the underlying subject matter of the oral agreement (a property development project) was located in Malaysia, and the governing law of the agreement was likely Malaysian law.
The Star Pty Ltd v Guoxing Cui [2023] SGHC 16
The High Court is bound by the Court of Appeal's decision in Burswood Nominees Ltd to recognise foreign judgments based on gambling debts, notwithstanding subsequent obiter dicta suggesting that the decision was incorrect.
Murakami Takako v Wiryadi Louise Maria and Others [2007] SGHC 6
A foreign judgment in rem is not subject to the 6-year limitation period under the Limitation Act. Furthermore, foreign courts have jurisdiction to determine the succession to movables wherever situated of a testator dying domiciled in that country, and such adjudication is bindi
Novus International Pte Ltd v Good Earth Agricultural Co Ltd [2007] SGHC 143
The court dismissed the defendant's appeal for a stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens, finding that the defendant failed to discharge the burden of showing that Hong Kong was a more appropriate forum.
Rickshaw Investments Ltd and Another v Nicolai Baron Von Uexkull [2006] SGHC 70
The court held that the jurisdiction clause in the agreement did not confer exclusive jurisdiction on German courts, but stayed the Singapore action on the basis that Germany was the more appropriate forum.
The "Rainbow Joy" [2005] SGHC 9
The court held that the Philippines was the natural and appropriate forum for the trial of the action, as the employment contract was governed by Philippine law and the majority of evidence and witnesses were located there.
Q & M Enterprises Sdn Bhd v Poh Kiat [2005] SGHC 155
The court affirmed that the principles of forum non conveniens in Spiliada apply in Singapore, and that the existence of a potential summary judgment claim under O 14 does not override the forum non conveniens analysis.
Kaki Bukit Industrial Park Pte Ltd v Ng Man Heng and Others [2004] SGHC 60
A stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens will only be granted if the defendant proves that there is another available forum that is clearly more appropriate for the trial of the action.
The "Hyundai Fortune" [2004] SGHC 45
The court refused to stay proceedings in favour of a foreign jurisdiction clause because the claimant demonstrated strong cause, including the lack of an arguable defence by the defendants and the strong connection of the dispute to Singapore.
Ang Ming Chuang v Singapore Airlines Ltd (Civil Aeronautics Administration, Third Party) [2004] SGHC 263
The court stayed the Singapore action on the grounds of lis alibi pendens and forum non conveniens, as the defendant had commenced a wider action in Taiwan and Taiwan was the more appropriate forum.
Mizuho Corporate Bank Ltd v Cho Hung Bank [2004] SGHC 159
The court will refuse a stay of proceedings if the defendant fails to establish that there is another available forum which is clearly or distinctly more appropriate than the Singapore forum.
Cheong Ghim Fah and Another v Murugian s/o Rangasamy (No 2) [2004] SGHC 125
In Cheong Ghim Fah v Murugian s/o Rangasamy [2004] SGHC 125, the court affirmed the plaintiffs' right to initiate proceedings in the High Court, ruling they met the statutory criteria under the Subordinate Courts Act. Costs were awarded on the High Court scale, emphasizing proper forum selection.
UCO Bank v Golden Shore Transportation Pte Ltd [2003] SGHC 137
Clause 17 of the bill of lading, which required claims to be determined at the port of delivery, was an exclusive jurisdiction clause, but the court refused to grant a stay of proceedings because the plaintiff showed strong cause.