LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

Sherridon Exim Pte Ltd v India International Insurance Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 93

The court held that the plaintiffs were not implicated in the smuggling, but their claims under the Agreement were not maintainable as a new agreement had been formed to revert to the original marine cargo policy, and the plaintiffs failed to sue within the time limit.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Shia Kian Eng (trading as Forest Contractors) v Nakano Singapore (Pte) Ltd [2001] SGHC 68

The court held that the sub-contracts were partly oral and partly in writing, and that the standard conditions of sub-contract were not incorporated. Termination of the sub-contracts by the main contractor was wrongful as the delay did not amount to repudiation.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

China Women Industry Development Corporation v Singapower Development Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 57

A consultant is not entitled to commission where the contract is result-oriented and the consultant fails to achieve the specified results (resolving investment problems and securing guaranteed returns).

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Mcdonald's Rest Restaurants Pte Ltd v Wisma Development Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 375

Contractual terms regarding valuation are binding and final if clear, and the court will not substitute its own opinion for that of the agreed experts.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Ng Poh Guan v Chan Ai Leng and Others [2001] SGHC 354

The court held that the plaintiff was in breach of contract for carrying out unauthorised renovation works on the premises, which entitled the defendants to rescind the agreement and claim damages.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Merchant Industries (S) Pte Ltd v X-Media Communications Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 338

The court held that the Plaintiffs wrongfully repudiated the Settlement Agreement by rejecting the server delivered by the Defendants, which met the contractual specifications.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Liang Huat Aluminium Industries Pte Ltd v Hi-Tek Construction Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 334

A beneficiary of an on-demand performance bond may be restrained from calling on the bond if it is unconscionable to do so, but the applicant must establish a strong prima facie case of unconscionability.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Brian Wesley Batie v Tan Boon Hock [2001] SGHC 323

The court held that there was an implied term in the agreement that the defendant should carry out the removal of his equipment and fittings in a reasonable manner to facilitate the plaintiff's business start-up.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

AFS Freight Management (2000) Pty Ltd v Freight Links Express Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 272

The court held that the defendant breached its contractual obligations by detaining the plaintiff's cargo without justification and rejected the defendant's counterclaim for debts owed by a predecessor company, finding no evidence of an agreement by the plaintiff to assume those

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Concordia Agritrading Pte Ltd v Cornelder Hoogewerff (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 248

A contractual time-bar clause requiring claims to be made within 12 months does not necessarily require the legal action to be instituted within that same period, especially if the clause is ambiguous.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Tan Hock Keng v L and M Group Investments Ltd

The court held that the word 'procure' in the context of the contract imposed a definite obligation to ensure performance, and that extrinsic evidence was admissible to construe an ambiguous limitation clause.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Leefon Corporation (Pte) Ltd v Stone Tec Material Supplies Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 216

A contract cannot be varied by conduct where an existing contract already governs the relationship and the conduct is consistent with that contract.

Sushant Shukla· ·11 min read
Singapore

HSBC Bank USA (formerly known as Republic National Bank of New York) v Francisco Lee Wong and Another [2001] SGHC 210

The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to close out the defendants' positions without a margin call under the contract, and that the defendants were responsible for the liquidation of their positions due to their own actions.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Wang Cong Qin Bobby v Ong Heng Huat [2001] SGHC 203

A private agreement between shareholders of a company is enforceable even if the company is not a party, provided the agreement is not illegal per se.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Em Services Private Limited v Triple Five Transportation & Engineering Construction Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 2

A contractor is entitled to the stipulated price for substantial performance of a contract, subject to a cross-claim for omissions or defects.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Cosmos Shipping Co Ltd v Manson Shipping (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 176

A party is not liable on a contract simply because they are part of a group of companies or because they share communication facilities with the contracting party.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Thomson Plaza (Pte) Ltd v Liquidators of Yaohan Department Store Singapore Pte Ltd (in liquidation) [2001] SGHC 172

The court held that the phrase 'subject to contract' in a letter of offer creates a condition precedent, meaning no binding contract exists until a formal lease is executed. Consequently, the applicant's claim for damages for breach of contract was dismissed.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Wong Kok Keong alias Wong Kock Khiang v CBN Holdings Pte Ltd and Others [2001] SGHC 149

The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove his claim to 95% of the shares in the company, as he had failed to perform his obligations under the joint venture agreement and had fabricated evidence to support his claims.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

KCC (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Anti Corrosion Pte Ltd [2001] SGHC 133

The Plaintiffs breached a fundamental term of the agreement by failing to supply paint certified to the SS 345 standard as agreed, and the paint supplied was not fit for external use.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Tiang Ming Sing v Datuk Ambrose Joseph Lee and Others [2000] SGHC 95

The court found that the agreements were moneylending transactions and that the plaintiff failed to establish agency, fiduciary duty, or negligence against the defendants.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

ING Bank N V v Inselatu Co Pte Ltd and Others [2000] SGHC 81

A wife who stands as surety for her husband's debts is not automatically entitled to special protection; the creditor is only put on inquiry if the transaction is not to the wife's financial advantage and there is a substantial risk of undue influence.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Jia Chen Construction Pte Ltd v Wei Sin Construction Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 73

The court held that the Defendants wrongfully repudiated the subcontract by unilaterally omitting works and failing to make timely payments, and that the Plaintiffs were entitled to the value of work done, loss of profits, and the return of the retention sum.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Tang Dynasty City Pte Ltd v Tan Seng Heng [2000] SGHC 56

A conditional approval from a lessor can constitute a 'Necessary Approval' under a sale agreement if the consent itself is granted, even if conditions are attached to that consent.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Capital Realty Pte Ltd v Chip Thye Enterprises (Pte) Ltd [2000] SGHC 52

The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant was the borrower of the loans, as the audit confirmation letter was rebutted by evidence suggesting the loans were made to Articon or Lee Chin Kian.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read