LITT
Try LITT free
Singapore Commodities Group Co, Pte Ltd v Founder Group (Hong Kong) Ltd (in liquidation) [2025] SGCA 35
The court held that a payment into court as security for a disputed debt pending arbitration is conditional upon the creditor establishing the debt in the arbitration. Where the arbitral tribunal makes no finding on the existence of the debt, the condition for payment out is not
Banque de Commerce et de Placements SA, DIFC Branch and another v China Aviation Oil (Singapore) Corp Ltd [2025] SGCA 33
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in Banque de Commerce et de Placements SA v China Aviation Oil, clarifying that the test for reliance in the tort of deceit is whether a misrepresentation played a 'real and substantial part' in inducing the representee, rejecting the 'proximate cause' test.
Wuhu Ruyi Xinbo Investment Partnership (Ltd Partnership) v European Topsoho Sàrl [2025] SGCA 32
The court held that proportionality does not apply to the enforcement of an unless order where there has been an intentional breach, and that the NYC does not prevent the enforcement of domestic procedural rules.
Zhu Su v Three Arrows Capital Ltd and others and other appeals [2025] SGCA 31
The court held that s 244(1) of the IRDA does not require a person to be summoned to court before they can be required to produce documents, and that an examination order may be set aside if it is oppressive due to the liquidator's intention to sue the examinee.
Da Hui Shipping (Pte) Ltd (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) v An Rong Shipping Pte Ltd (in liquidation) (Societe Generale, Singapore Branch and another, non-parties) [2025] SGCA 30
A non-admiralty in personam action cannot be used to overreach into sale proceeds of vessels held in court under admiralty jurisdiction, as such proceeds are only available to claimants with judgments in rem.
CH Biovest Pte Ltd v Envy Asset Management Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and others [2025] SGCA 3
The court held that payments made by a Ponzi scheme operator to investors in excess of their principal investment are not contractually owed profits but are non-contractual payments that can be avoided under insolvency avoidance provisions.
Natixis, Singapore Branch v Seshadri Rajagopalan and others and other appeals [2025] SGCA 29
The court held that the judicial managers did not dispose of the vessel as the judicial sale by the foreign court was not a disposal by them, and that a statutory lien created by the issuance of a writ in rem does not constitute a security interest under the IRDA.
East Coast Podiatry Centre Pte Ltd v Family Podiatry Centre Pte Ltd [2025] SGCA 28
The court held that the threshold requirement of 'trade mark use' (use as a badge of origin) remains a necessary prerequisite for trade mark infringement in Singapore, even in the context of internet advertising. The court rejected the 'effect-centric' approach derived from CJEU
Yit Chee Wah and another v Inner Mongolia Huomei-Hongjun Aluminium Electricity Co, Ltd and another appeal [2025] SGCA 27
The court held that in an application to expunge or reduce a proof of debt under r 133(1) of the CIR Rules, the liquidator must show a prima facie case that the proof was improperly admitted, and the court then determines the validity of the debt de novo with the creditor bearing
Wei Ho-Hung v Lyu Jun [2025] SGCA 26
The court held that 'immediate compliance' with a court order under O 17 r 2(3) of the ROC 2021 is subject to a standard of reasonableness, and that a contemnor's conduct must be viewed as a continuum to determine if there was an intentional breach.
Lun Yaodong Clarence v Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP [2025] SGCA 25
The court held that a dispute over the validity of a retainer agreement (LOE) is not an essential element of a solicitor-and-client costs assessment proceeding, and thus does not warrant a stay of the assessment proceedings in favour of arbitration.
Cao Pei v McCom Holding Ltd [2025] SGCA 24
An extension of time for filing a Notice of Appeal will not be granted where the delay is caused by a solicitor's elementary procedural errors and the intended appeal is hopeless.
DKT v DKU [2025] SGCA 23
An infra petita challenge requires showing that the tribunal completely failed to consider an essential issue, and that this failure caused actual prejudice. The court will not re-examine the merits or the adequacy of the tribunal's analysis.
Ramdhan bin Lajis v Public Prosecutor [2025] SGCA 22
In Ramdhan bin Lajis v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Sentencing and Procedure — Criminal review.
GIL v Public Prosecutor [2025] SGCA 21
Section 116A(1) of the Evidence Act creates a presumption that an electronic record was accurately produced or communicated by a device or process, but does not create a presumption that the substantive content or data within that record is true or reliable.
Khoo Phaik Ean Patricia and another v Khoo Phaik Eng Katherine and others [2025] SGCA 20
The court held that bank documents, including survivorship clauses, are not dispositive of beneficial ownership unless they expressly declare such interests, and that the resulting trust analysis remains the primary framework for determining beneficial ownership in joint accounts
Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar and another [2025] SGCA 2
A Disciplinary Tribunal has a statutory duty to 'hear and investigate' a matter, which requires it to proactively exercise its case management powers to facilitate the adduction of relevant and material evidence when parties face procedural difficulties.
Affert Resources Pte Ltd (in court compulsory winding up) v Industries Chimiques du Senegal and another [2025] SGCA 19
A transaction for the purpose of s 98 of the Bankruptcy Act is defined widely to include any arrangement, which may comprise a series of associated or inter-connected agreements entered into for a common purpose, even if the parties to the agreements are not identical.
CEO v Public Prosecutor and other matters [2025] SGCA 18
The court held that allegations of inadequate legal assistance by trial counsel must be substantiated by clear and compelling evidence of flagrant or egregious incompetence that resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The court also affirmed that appellate courts will not entertain
UT Singapore Services Pte Ltd v Goh Thien Phong and others and another appeal [2025] SGCA 17
The classification of creditors in a scheme of arrangement is a jurisdictional requirement. Objections to class composition should be raised at the convening stage, but the court must consider them at the sanction stage even if raised late, subject to potential cost consequences.
Roshdi Bin Abdullah Altway v Public Prosecutor and another matter [2025] SGCA 16
A second application for permission to bring a PACC application cannot be filed while a previous PACC application is pending, and the court may summarily dismiss applications that are meritless and filed as a stopgap measure to delay execution.
Muhammad Salleh bin Hamid v Public Prosecutor [2025] SGCA 15
The court held that an applicant for a review of a criminal decision must satisfy the strict threshold of showing 'sufficient material' that is reliable, substantial, and capable of showing a miscarriage of justice, and that unfounded allegations against former counsel are repreh
Palm Grove Beach Hotels Pvt Ltd v Hilton Worldwide Manage Ltd and another [2025] SGCA 14
The court will not set aside an arbitral award for breach of natural justice or infra petita where the issues were not adequately pleaded or submitted to the tribunal, and will not allow setting aside applications to be used as a backdoor appeal on the merits.
Sapura Fabrication Sdn Bhd and others v GAS and another appeal [2025] SGCA 13
The court affirmed the Wang Aifeng test for carve-outs from moratoria in restructuring proceedings, rejecting an 'exceptional circumstances' test, and held that the court's mandatory obligation to enforce arbitration agreements does not automatically override the insolvency regim