LITTLITT Try LITT free
Singapore

Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency [2006] SGHC 229

The court held that the defendant, as the superintending officer, did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff (the main contractor) for pure economic loss in the context of a building contract where the plaintiff had other contractual remedies against the employer.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Navaseelan Balasingam v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGHC 228

The court held that the totality principle should not be applied in a way that unduly constrains the aggregate sentence when multiple distinct offences are committed, and that imprisonment sentences may be backdated to the date of arrest.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Terence Yeo Guan Chye and Another v Lau Siew Kim [2006] SGHC 227

The court held that amendments to pleadings on the last day of trial may be granted if any resulting prejudice to the opposing party can be compensated by costs.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Ee Kee Chai v Chew Joo Song John and Others [2006] SGHC 225

An ex parte order for the appointment of provisional liquidators will be set aside if the applicant fails to disclose material facts to the court.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Progen Engineering Pte Ltd v Winter Engineering (S) Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 224

The court held that an arbitrator's unilateral fixing of fees does not constitute a valid reason for a party's delay in appealing an award, and that the court will not exercise its discretion to extend time for an appeal where the delay is substantial and the party has failed to

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming Eric (practising under the name and style of W P Architects) [2006] SGHC 222

In cases of concurrent liability in contract and tort, the stricter contractual rules of remoteness apply. The court also affirmed the 'two-stage process' for determining duty of care in negligence for pure economic loss.

Sushant Shukla· ·15 min read
Singapore

Chua Kim Leng (Cai Jinling) v Phillip Securities Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 221

The court held that an exchange of emails between the parties constituted a binding contract for the sharing of commission from a share offer, and that the plaintiff was entitled to her share of the commission, which was to be set off against her loan obligations.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Lee Hsien Loong v Singapore Democratic Party and Others and Another Suit [2006] SGHC 220

Politicians have the right to sue for defamation in their personal capacity if defamatory statements about the government or political institutions are capable of being understood to refer to them.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Hwang Yew Kong [2006] SGHC 22

The court held that life imprisonment was appropriate for an accused suffering from schizophrenia who committed a violent offence, as the risk of relapse and the potential for future harm to others outweighed the mitigating factor of his mental condition.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Anthony Wee Soon Kim v The Law Society of Singapore [2006] SGHC 219

A solicitor is not required to verify the accuracy of a client's instructions embodied in an affidavit unless there is evidence the solicitor knew or had reason to believe the statement was false.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Banque Cantonale Vaudoise v Fujitrans (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 217

A party seeking discovery in a subsequent application must show that circumstances have substantially changed since the first application to warrant a different view, otherwise the application may be dismissed as a fishing expedition.

Sushant Shukla· ·11 min read
Singapore

Law Society of Singapore v Tan Buck Chye Dave [2006] SGHC 216

A solicitor was suspended for grossly improper conduct after offering monetary incentives to third parties to secure conveyancing work. This breach of the Legal Profession Act highlights the court's strict stance against unethical client procurement.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Ritronics Components (S'pore) Pte Ltd [2006] SGHC 215

Interrogatories are generally not appropriate after a trial has commenced, as the appropriate mechanism for eliciting information at that stage is cross-examination.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Wee Soon Kim Anthony v Law Society of Singapore [2006] SGHC 214

The court held that the appeal procedure under s 96 of the Legal Profession Act is only available for specific determinations by the Council, and that the Council's decision to exempt a transaction under r 34(c) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules is not subject

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Gelau Anak Jimbat [2006] SGHC 212

The court held that in sentencing for culpable homicide, the fact that the accused pursued the victim and stabbed him multiple times while the victim was fleeing outweighs the mitigating factor that the victim may have been the initial aggressor.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Goh Nellie v Goh Lian Teck and Others [2006] SGHC 211

The court held that s 56(1) of the Trustees Act cannot be used to sanction a sale of trust property where the trust instrument contains an express prohibition against such a sale. The court also found that the issue of whether the beneficiaries had a veto over the sale of the pro

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Tay Way Bock v Yeunh Oi Siong [2006] SGHC 21

A stay of proceedings on the grounds of forum non conveniens is granted where the court is satisfied that there is another available forum that is clearly more appropriate for the trial of the action, and the plaintiff fails to show special circumstances requiring the trial to re

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Justlogin Pte Ltd and Another v Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp Ltd and Another [2006] SGHC 209

In a claim for loss of chance, the court must determine if the breach caused the loss of a real or substantial chance, and if so, evaluate the quantum of damages based on the value of that chance.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Veolia Water Systems (SEA) Pte Ltd v Engineered Products and Services Pte Ltd and Others [2006] SGHC 208

The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendants converted the items or breached confidence, and that the restrictive covenants in the employment contract ceased upon the termination of employment.

Sushant Shukla· ·16 min read
Singapore

Public Prosecutor v Tan Kiam Peng [2006] SGHC 207

The presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA is rebuttable by the accused on a balance of probabilities, and the court must assess the credibility of the accused's claim of ignorance in light of all evidence, including the failure to inspect the goods.

Sushant Shukla· ·13 min read
Singapore

Government of the Republic of the Philippines v Philippine International Air Terminals Co, Inc [2006] SGHC 206

The court held that the principle of severability is a necessary ingredient in the Tribunal's reasoning when determining the governing law of an arbitration agreement, and that the Tribunal did not breach natural justice by deciding this issue as part of its partial award.

Sushant Shukla· ·14 min read
Singapore

Hong Leong Singapore Finance Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd [2006] SGHC 205

The court held that proprietary estoppel requires a broad inquiry into whether it would be unconscionable for a party to resile from a representation or expectation they encouraged, and that the remedy must be proportionate to the detriment suffered.

Sushant Shukla· ·17 min read
Singapore

NK v NL [2006] SGHC 204

The court determined the division of matrimonial assets and custody arrangements based on the parties' contributions and the welfare of the children, rejecting claims for double-counting of contributions and excessive maintenance.

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read
Singapore

Tan Chui Lian v Neo Liew Eng [2006] SGHC 203

Section 51(6) of the Housing and Development Act does not prohibit resulting or constructive trusts where the parties are already eligible owners of the HDB flat; it only prohibits trusts that circumvent eligibility criteria. Equity will adjust the beneficial interests of co-owne

Sushant Shukla· ·12 min read