LITT
Try LITT free
Tan Yew Huat v Sin Joo Huat Hardware Pte Ltd and another matter [2023] SGHC 276
The court held that a winding up order on just and equitable grounds under s 125(1)(i) of the IRDA will generally be declined if the applicant has an alternative exit mechanism, such as a voluntary winding up, and no unfairness is established.
RB Investments Pte Ltd v Kardachi, Jason Aleksander and others [2023] SGHC 274
Legal advice privilege is not lost if a document is forwarded to a third party, provided the communication remains confidential and the third party is an authorised representative. However, if the communication is not for the purpose of legal advice and the third party is not an
SW Trustees Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) and another v Teodros Ashenafi Tesemma and others (Teodros Ashenafi Tesemma, third party) [2023] SGHC 273
The court held that the requirements in Ladd v Marshall apply to the admission of fresh evidence in interlocutory appeals, though they may be applied with less rigour than in appeals following a full trial. Furthermore, the court clarified that for s 29(1)(a) of the Limitation Ac
Tan Zhi Wei Alan v Tan Jia Lin Jaylin [2023] SGHC 271
An application to remove a joint administrator must be commenced in the Family Courts in the first instance, as it falls within the jurisdiction of the Family Justice Courts.
Hyflux Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) and others v KPMG LLP [2023] SGHC 270
Requests for further and better particulars that are in substance requests for evidence are improper and should be refused.
Jiangsu New Huaming International Trading Co Ltd v PT Musim Mas and another [2023] SGHC 27
A plaintiff may be granted leave to amend pleadings to reinsert a claim previously struck out for non-compliance with an 'unless order', provided the claim is not time-barred and the amendment does not cause uncompensable prejudice.
SCP Holdings Pte Ltd v I Concept Global Growth Fund and another matter [2023] SGHC 269
An agreement to agree is not a contract and is unenforceable. The court will set aside a statutory demand only if there are triable issues as to whether the debt is payable.
Tan Siew Kheng (personal representative of the estate of Tan Siew Cheng, deceased) v Teo Kian Kian (personal representative of the estate of Tan Siew Hiang, deceased) [2023] SGHC 268
The court has the power to order a sale of land in lieu of partition under the SCJA, but it does not have the power to order a co-owner to compulsorily purchase another co-owner's share at a price lower than the best price obtainable.
DBL v DBM [2023] SGHC 267
A party challenging an arbitration award for breach of natural justice must establish that the breach was connected to the making of the award and caused actual prejudice; mere technical breaches are insufficient.
Seatrium New Energy Ltd (formerly known as Keppel FELS Ltd) v HJ Shipbuilding & Construction Co, Ltd (formerly known as Hanjin Heavy Industries and Construction Co Ltd) [2023] SGHC 264
The court held that the Side Letter varied the Sub-Contract, precluding the plaintiff from making claims against the defendant for welding defects, except through the defendant's warranty obligations, which had already expired.
Sabyasachi Mukherjee and another v Pradeepto Kumar Biswas and another matter [2023] SGHC 262
A bankrupt is incompetent to commence, continue, or defend any action without the previous sanction of the Official Assignee or Private Trustee in Bankruptcy, unless the action falls within the specific exceptions in s 401(1) of the IRDA.
Tsudakoma Corp v Global Trade Well Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 26
The court held that a good arguable case existed that an exclusive jurisdiction clause in a 2017 MOU, incorporated into a 2018 MOU, applied to the dispute, and that the respondent failed to show strong cause to refuse a stay of proceedings.
Maybank Singapore Ltd v Synergy Global Resources Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 258
The court held that the debtor failed to raise a triable issue regarding its cross-claim or the claimant's exercise of contractual discretion to recall banking facilities, thus the winding up application was allowed.
Li Jialin and another v Wingcrown Investment Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 256
A deposit of 20% of the purchase price is customary and moderate in Singapore property transactions and constitutes a true deposit, which is forfeitable upon breach regardless of actual loss. The penalty rule does not apply to true deposits.
Tiger Pictures Entertainment Ltd v Encore Films Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 255
A statutory exclusive licensee under the Copyright Act 2021 cannot grant a statutory exclusive licence by way of sub-licence; such a sub-licence is merely a contractual sub-licence and does not divest the original exclusive licensee of their standing to sue for copyright infringe
Ho Tze Woon v Singapore Medical Council [2023] SGHC 254
A medical practitioner commits an offence under s 53(1)(e) of the MRA if they fail to provide professional services of the quality reasonably expected of them, which is an objective standard. The Wong Meng Hang sentencing framework is not automatically applicable to all s 53(1)(e
Re X Diamond Capital Pte Ltd (Metech International Ltd, non-party) [2023] SGHC 253
The court held that the applicant for a judicial management order need only establish a 'real prospect' that the statutory purposes of judicial management will be achieved, which is a lower threshold than the balance of probabilities.
How Soo Feng v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2023] SGHC 252
The court held that the appellants were knowingly parties to the carrying on of the business of TGL PL for a fraudulent purpose, as they knew the business model was inherently loss-making and unsustainable, and they had no plausible belief in any profit-generating mechanism.
Ma Zhen Hu Michael v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 251
The court held that a 15-month disqualification order for dangerous driving was not manifestly excessive where the offender had a poor driving record and the potential harm was significant.
Majestica Enterprises Ltd and another v Kams Singapore Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) [2023] SGHC 250
The court may grant a prospective order under s 204(3) of the IRDA to give funding creditors an advantage over other creditors, provided the advantage is reasonable, other creditors had an opportunity to fund, and the liquidator retains control over the proceedings.
Kesavan Chandiran v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 25
The difference in age of co-offenders engaged in the same criminal enterprise can be a valid basis for modifying the application of the parity principle between them, even if both are above the age of majority, provided the age difference is significant.
PT Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) TBK, Singapore Branch v Farooq Ahmad Mann (in his capacity as judicial manager) and another and other matters [2023] SGHC 249
The court held that a less exacting standard applies to an interim judicial manager adjudicating a proof of debt for the limited purpose of voting at a pre-appointment meeting, requiring only a prima facie case.
The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General and another matter [2023] SGHC 247
The High Court held that in an appeal under s 17 of the POFMA, the court must determine whether the subject material contained the subject statement at the time it was first communicated, and post-issuance amendments (such as addenda) are not relevant to this determination.
Mohd Sadique bin Ibrahim Marican v The Law Society of Singapore and another [2023] SGHC 246
The court held that an applicant for reinstatement to the Roll must satisfy the three-factor test (Time, Rehabilitation, Public Interest) and that the applicant in this case had demonstrated full rehabilitation after a significant period of disbarment.