LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

CS Bored Pile System Pte Ltd v Evan Lim & Co Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 11

The court held that a signed quotation with a stamp and a note 'Terms & Conditions to be discussed' constituted a binding acceptance of the contract, as the main purpose of the meeting was to agree on prices for a tender, and the note was an act of excess caution.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

The "Pacific Vigorous" [2006] SGHC 103

The plaintiff's acceptance of partial payment from the buyer for the sale of goods did not constitute an election at common law to waive its right to sue the shipowner for misdelivery of the cargo, as the remedies against the buyer and the shipowner were cumulative rather than al

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Singapore Telecommunications Ltd v Starhub Cable Vision Ltd [2005] SGHC 80

In Singapore Telecommunications Ltd v Starhub Cable Vision Ltd [2005] SGHC 80, the court confirmed a breach of contract via unauthorized tapping but dismissed the claim for damages, upholding a limitation of liability clause that expressly excluded recovery for lost revenues or profits.

Sushant Shukla· ·7 min read
Singapore

Koon Seng Construction Pte Ltd v Siem Seng Hing & Co (Pte) Ltd [2005] SGHC 8

A contract is not concluded where the parties intend that it shall not become binding until a further condition (such as a letter of award) has been fulfilled.

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

Advantest Corporate Office (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Another v SL Link Co Ltd (also known as Solar Link Co Ltd) and Another [2005] SGHC 75

In Advantest v SL Link [2005] SGHC 75, the High Court ruled for the plaintiffs, finding the defendants breached a manufacturing agreement through unauthorized competition and misuse of confidential information. The court upheld the non-competition clauses and dismissed the defendants' counterclaim.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Ong and Co Pte Ltd v Lua Soo Theng [2005] SGHC 6

The indemnity clause in the dealer's representative's letter of appointment was wide enough to cover margin account losses, and the memorandum of settlement did not compromise the plaintiff's claim for such losses.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

SM Integrated Transware Pte Ltd v Schenker Singapore (Pte) Ltd [2005] SGHC 58

In SM Integrated Transware v Schenker Singapore, the High Court ruled a binding lease existed, ordering Schenker to pay $505,691.85 in damages. The case clarifies contract formation principles and the strict requirements for proving mitigation of loss in commercial lease disputes.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Tri-Oceanic Pte Ltd v Chun Cheng Fishery Enterprise Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 56

The court held that the defendant was bound by the 'as is' clause in the contract, which excluded claims regarding quality, and that the defendant failed to prove that the fish delivered did not conform to the contract.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Gan Cheng Chan v Gan Meng Hui [2005] SGHC 55

In Gan Cheng Chan v Gan Meng Hui [2005] SGHC 55, the High Court rejected claims of undue influence, ruling that the defendant affirmed the Settlement Agreement through part performance. The court held that a party cannot simultaneously claim an agreement is disadvantageous while denying legal intent

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Stahltec Metallhandels GmbH v Chuan Ann Metals Pte Ltd and Others [2005] SGHC 46

In Stahltec Metallhandels GmbH v Chuan Ann Metals [2005] SGHC 46, the High Court upheld a retention of title claim for identified goods but rejected claims for conversion against receivers and storage charges, citing the plaintiff's failure to mitigate losses via interim sale orders.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Standard Chartered Bank v Neocorp International Ltd [2005] SGHC 43

A conclusive evidence clause in a guarantee does not preclude the court from reviewing the legal basis of a claim, as the clause is a matter of contractual interpretation and does not confer an absolute right to determine the justiciability of a claim.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Leow Chin Hua v Ng Poh Buan [2005] SGHC 39

A party who conducts their own investigation and does not rely on a misrepresentation cannot claim to have been induced by it.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd v OSV Engineering Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 31

In Kensteel Engineering v OSV Engineering [2005] SGHC 31, the court dismissed the plaintiff's claim, ruling that a party cannot unilaterally redesign equipment and charge the defendant for improvements. The defendant's counterclaim was allowed, subject to expert assessment of specific defects.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Ensure Engineering Pte Ltd v Invista (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as Du Pont Singapore Pte Ltd) [2005] SGHC 237

In Ensure Engineering Pte Ltd v Invista (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 237, the court dismissed the defendant's counterclaim for negligence, ruling they failed to prove the plaintiff caused the boiler damage. The plaintiff's claim for payment for work and materials was allowed.

Sushant Shukla· ·8 min read
Singapore

Panwah Steel Pte Ltd v Koh Brothers Building & Civil Engineering Contractor (Pte) Ltd [2005] SGHC 235

The court held that the agreement was not 'project-specific' and that the tolerance provision allowed both parties to exercise the option to supply or order 10% less than the contract quantity.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Evergreat Construction Co Pte Ltd v Presscrete Engineering Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 224

An expert's determination is binding as a matter of contract and cannot be challenged unless the expert has departed from his instructions in a material respect or acted with fraud or corruption.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Cheah Geok Tuan (alias Seah Geok Tuan) and Another v Lie Khin Sin and Another [2005] SGHC 210

The court held that a written agreement for the sale of shares with a buyback option was in substance a loan agreement, given the unusual terms and the surrounding evidence.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Yip Jenn Yeuan v Ng Ah Chen [2005] SGHC 21

The High Court dismissed the appeal in Yip Jenn Yeuan v Ng Ah Chen, ruling that an agreement on liability without settled quantum does not constitute a binding contract. The court held that such agreements cannot be used to revive time-barred tort claims as a fresh cause of action in contract.

Sushant Shukla· ·7 min read
Singapore

IPTE Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v JMA Technologies Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 192

The court held that the defendant failed to prove that the test systems were defective or in breach of warranties, and dismissed the counterclaim for lack of evidence.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Coterie International (S) Pte Ltd v MAE Engineering Ltd [2005] SGHC 18

A party's failure to make payment under an ongoing contract, without an intention to no longer perform, does not entitle the other party to treat the contract as at an end without giving the requisite notice of termination.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Petrosin Corp Pte Ltd v Clough Engineering Ltd [2005] SGHC 170

The court found that there was no concluded oral agreement on 18 October 2001 as the parties intended to put the terms in writing and sign them, and no such signed agreement existed.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Jet Holding Ltd and Others v Cooper Cameron (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Another [2005] SGHC 149

The court held that the defendants were concurrently liable in negligence for the failure of a refurbished slip joint due to insufficient wall thickness caused by machining, and that the defendants were not entitled to rely on exemption clauses that were not properly incorporated

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Natferrous Pte Ltd v Tradelink Hardware Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 131

In Natferrous Pte Ltd v Tradelink Hardware Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 131, the High Court ruled that the defendant breached its contract by supplying inferior 200 series steel instead of the agreed 300 series, awarding the plaintiff $219,032.26 in damages for the quality discrepancy.

Sushant Shukla· ·9 min read
Singapore

C S Geotechnic Pte Ltd v Neocorp Innovations Pte Ltd [2005] SGHC 116

A party cannot shift the burden of a contract to another without the consent of the contractee.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read