LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

COSCO Shipping Specialized Carriers Co, Ltd v PT OKI Pulp & Paper Mills and others [2025] SGHC 87

The High Court held that it has jurisdiction to vary an anti-suit injunction issued by the Court of Appeal. It further held that a party who has withdrawn its notice of intention to contest proceedings loses its 'interest in the appeal' for the purposes of service of appeal paper

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Sim Khong (Pte) Ltd v Lion Peak Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 83

A landlord is entitled to forfeit a lease for breach of covenant where the lease expressly provides for re-entry upon such breach, subject to the statutory notice requirements under the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd v Argoglobal Underwriting Asia Pacific Pte Ltd and others [2025] SGHC 82

The court held that the vessel was a constructive total loss caused by perils of the seas, and that the plaintiff was entitled to recover under Section [A] of the marine insurance policy.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Sugumaran s/o Kannan v Public Prosecutor and another matter [2025] SGHC 81

The court dismissed the appeal against conviction and sentence, finding that the trial judge's assessment of witness credibility was not plainly wrong and that the sentencing was appropriate.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Rita Kishinchand Bhojwani v HVS Properties Pte Ltd and others [2025] SGHC 80

The court dismissed the plaintiff's claims for proprietary estoppel, contractual licence, and conspiracy, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case and that her evidence was unreliable.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Sze Pak Hei Gabriel (formerly known as Gabriel See Wei Yang) v Public Prosecutor [2025] SGHC 8

The court held that procedural irregularities in an ancillary hearing do not invalidate a conviction unless they occasion a failure of justice under s 423(a) of the CPC, and that the voluntariness of a statement is only challenged when the Defence raises it.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Re Muhammad Naseer [2025] SGHC 79

The court will not assist an application that appears to circumvent HDB rules regarding the minimum occupation period for HDB flats.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Chong Shiong Hui [2025] SGHC 78

The court held that in cases of attempted murder involving vicious and persistent attacks, retribution and general deterrence are the primary sentencing objectives, and rehabilitative factors are generally displaced.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

ArcelorMittal Holdings AG v Liberty House Group Pte Ltd and another matter [2025] SGHC 77

The court dismissed an application for a moratorium under s 64(1) IRDA because the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of securing the proposed scheme funding, and allowed an application for judicial management under s 91(1) IRDA as it was likely to produce a be

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Castillon Security (S) Pte Ltd v Muhammad Shaun Eric bin Abdullah (alias De Silva Shaun Eric) [2025] SGHC 75

The court held that government grants received by an employer based on the employment of its employees should be apportioned between divisions for profit-sharing purposes, even if the employer chose to reflect them as 'other income' in its accounts. The court also affirmed that a

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Koh Lin Yee v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd [2025] SGHC 74

The court dismissed an application for an extension of time to appeal because the delay was excessive, the explanation for the delay was unsatisfactory, and the intended appeal was hopeless.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Shee See Kuen and others v Sugiono Wiyono Sugialam and others and another appeal [2025] SGHC 73

The court dismissed the appellants' appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision to disallow substantive amendments to their statements of claim, finding that the amendments were belated, would introduce new claims that were time-barred, and would cause prejudice to the resp

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Farooq Ahmad Mann (in his capacity as the private trustee in bankruptcy of Li Hua) v Xia Zheng [2025] SGHC 70

The court held that under the Rules of Court 2021, there is no strict restriction against filing supplementary affidavits in support of an application for permission to commence committal proceedings, provided that the supplementation is justified and the respondent is not prejud

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Che’som bte Abdullah v Qurratu Ain bte Mohamed Yusope [2025] SGHC 7

The court dismissed the claimant's application to set aside a property transfer, finding that the claimant failed to prove she did not understand the transaction or that her consent was vitiated by undue influence.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Teo Hwee Peng and other appeals [2025] SGHC 69

The decision in [2025] SGHC 69 represents a significant appellate intervention regarding the integrity of law enforcement officers and the boundaries of "informant management" as a defense against corruption charges. The case involves Teo Hwee Peng ("Teo"), a Checkpoints Inspecto

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

White Oak Trade Finance Assetco 1, LLC v Rhodium International Trading USA, Inc [2025] SGHC 68

The court dismissed an application for the appointment of an additional liquidator, finding that the appointment was sought solely to facilitate a deposition in US proceedings rather than to further the liquidation process.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Re King & Wood Mallesons and other matters [2025] SGHC 67

The court confirmed that the PRC reorganisation proceedings qualified as a 'foreign main proceeding' under the UNCITRAL Model Law, as the debtor's COMI was in the PRC, and granted the requested relief.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Vikramathithan a/l Rasu v AK Equine Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 65

The court has discretion under s 344G(3) of the Companies Act 1967 to grant a limitation direction to exclude a period of time from the limitation period when restoring a struck-off company to the Register, provided the causative and just requirements are satisfied.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Ren Xin Wu v Lee Kuan Fung and another and another matter [2025] SGHC 63

The judgment in Ren Xin Wu v Lee Kuan Fung and another and another matter [2025] SGHC 63 represents a significant clarification of the boundaries of directors' duties during periods of financial distress and the high evidentiary threshold required to establish "sham" transactions

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Foo Li Ping and another matter [2025] SGHC 60

The court established sentencing principles for the offence of allowing the death of a child under s 304C of the Penal Code, emphasizing that culpability is assessed based on the offender's awareness of the risk of grievous hurt and their failure to protect the victim.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Re Dasin Retail Trust Management Pte Ltd [2025] SGHC 6

A trustee-manager of a business trust is a 'company' within the meaning of Part 5 of the IRDA and may apply for a moratorium under s 64 of the IRDA in respect of liabilities incurred in its capacity as trustee-manager.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

DJY v DJZ and another [2025] SGHC 59

The test for an Erinford injunction involves a balancing exercise of the prejudice caused to parties, in addition to considering the likelihood of success on appeal and whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port and Terminal Pte Ltd & Others [2025] SGHC 58

The court held that conveyances made with the intent to defraud creditors are voidable under s 73B of the CLPA, and that sham transactions where parties do not intend to create the legal relations they appear to create are void.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

See Kian Kok v Public Prosecutor and another matter [2025] SGHC 56

The court held that fresh evidence is not necessary if it does not satisfy the criteria of relevance and reliability, and that general deterrence is the dominant sentencing consideration for fraudulent tenancy offences.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read