LITT
Try LITT free
Kuala Lumpur City Securities Sdn Bhd v Boston Asset Management Pte Ltd (formerly known as Universal Network Education Pte Ltd) and Another [2006] SGHC 99
The court dismissed an application to set aside a default judgment and stay proceedings. The defendant failed to demonstrate a defence with a real prospect of success or prove that another forum was more appropriate under forum non conveniens principles.
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.
Mala Shukla v Jayant Amritanand Shukla (Danialle An, co-respondent) [2002] SGHC 96
The court stayed divorce proceedings in Singapore on the ground of forum non conveniens, finding that India was the more appropriate forum given the existing litigation and the parties' connections.
Re A (an infant) [2002] SGHC 60
The court held that the French court was the more appropriate forum for custody proceedings given the child's cultural connections and the fact that the father had already invoked the French court's jurisdiction.
Bayerische Landesbank Girozentrale v Kong Kok Keong and another action [2002] SGHC 51
The court will refuse a stay of proceedings and give effect to a jurisdiction clause unless the defendant shows exceptional circumstances amounting to strong cause.
Datuk Hamzah Bin Mohd Noor v Tunku Ibrahim Ismail Ibni Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj [2001] SGHC 282
The court held that Malaysia was the most appropriate forum for the dispute, as both parties were Malaysian residents and the underlying transaction had the closest connection to Malaysia.
Andre Ravindran S Arul v Tunku Ibrahim Ismail bin Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj [2001] SGHC 209
The court held that the defendant failed to establish that Malaysia was a more appropriate forum for the trial, and that the Singapore court should not lightly surrender its jurisdiction.
Luis Chang Soh v Comwealth Investments & Trading Pte Ltd [2000] SGHC 16
The court granted a stay of proceedings in favour of a pending foreign action in Paris, applying the principle of forum non conveniens, as the plaintiff was found to be abusing the court process by initiating multiple actions to avoid the foreign jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Arif Azim Co. Ltd. v. Micromax Informatics FZE: A Deep Dive into the Distinction between 'Seat' and 'Venue' in International Arbitration
The Supreme Court in Arif Azim Co. Ltd. v. Micromax Informatics FZE clarified the distinction between the 'seat' and 'venue' in arbitration, reinforcing party autonomy and defining Dubai as the seat under UAE law, limiting Indian courts' jurisdiction.