LITT
Try LITT free
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.
Info-Communications Development Authority of Singapore v Singapore Telecommunications Ltd [2002] SGHC 95
The mere disclosure of a document does not make it a fact in issue, and a waiver of privilege made out of court is as valid as one made in court.
Sutjiawang Johanis alias Tjia Eng Liong v Tjia Eng Soei [2002] SGHC 94
The court held that the plaintiff was the beneficial owner of the shares and monies in question, as the defendant failed to prove that the remittances were fruits of his own investment in Bank Pelita.
Public Prosecutor v Yap Siew Luan [2002] SGHC 93
A person who knowingly handles controlled drugs cannot excuse themselves by claiming they were misled about the quantity or quality of the drugs by a third party.
Chan Mei Yoong Letticia v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 92
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence for employing an immigration offender, holding that the appellant failed to exercise due diligence as required by the Immigration Act and that the trial judge's findings of fact were not against the weight of evidence.
Wu Liang Zhu v Chan Yue Ming and Another [2002] SGHC 91
The court reduced the assessment of loss of future earnings because the original assessment failed to account for the plaintiff's partial recovery and ability to work.
Drolia Mineral Industries Pte Ltd v Natural Resources Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 90
A foreign plaintiff who commences an action in Singapore submits to the jurisdiction of the court in respect of any counterclaim that is properly connected to the main action or is procedurally convenient to be tried together.
Tay Kim Chuan Patrick v Public Accountants Board [2002] SGHC 9
An auditor's duty is to exercise reasonable care and skill, which is an exacting standard that must be assessed in light of modern conditions, professional codes, and surrounding circumstances, avoiding the benefit of hindsight.
Public Prosecutor v Kee Hwee Lun [2002] SGHC 89
In Public Prosecutor v Kee Hwee Lun, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of No catchword.
PSA Corp Ltd v Korea Exchange Bank [2002] SGHC 88
The court held that the current s 47 of the Banking Act establishes a general prohibition on the disclosure of customer information, subject only to the exceptions in the Sixth Schedule.
Ricky Charles s/o Gabriel Thanabalan v Chua Boon Yeow [2002] SGHC 87
The High Court does not have the power to transfer proceedings from the District Court to the High Court once an interlocutory judgment has been entered in the District Court, as the limit of damages is fixed upon entry of such judgment.
Mae Engineering Ltd v Dragages Singapore Pte Ltd (fka Dragages et Travaux Publics (S) Pte Ltd) [2002] SGHC 86
The court will not stay proceedings in favour of arbitration where the defendant has no genuine dispute and is merely attempting to delay payment of an indisputable claim.
Lumbini Pte Ltd v Toh Peng Noi and Others (Tan Soo Kiat and Others, Third Parties) [2002] SGHC 85
The High Court dismissed Lumbini Pte Ltd's claims in their entirety, ruling that the plaintiff failed to establish a valid cause of action regarding business asset transfers. The court found the dispute stemmed from a disagreement over payment rather than a breach of duty or wrongful transfer.
Cheng Siah Johnson v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 84
The statutory presumption in s 22 of the Misuse of Drugs Act is two-fold, triggering both actus reus and mens rea, and the burden of proof lies on the defence to rebut it on a balance of probabilities.
Overseas Union Insurance Ltd v Home and Overseas Insurance Co Ltd and another application [2002] SGHC 83
Leave to appeal is required for taxation of bills of costs where the amount in dispute is below the statutory minimum in s 21 SCJA. The amount in dispute is calculated as the difference between the amount submitted and the amount awarded.
The Alexandrea [2002] SGHC 82
The court held that for an action in rem to be brought under s 3(1)(l) of the High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act, the claim must arise in connection with the specific ship to which the goods or materials were supplied.
Voss Peer v APL Co Pte Ltd [2002] SGHC 81
A carrier is contractually bound to deliver cargo only upon production of the original bill of lading, regardless of whether it is an 'order bill' or a 'straight bill'.
Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa and Others [2002] SGHC 80
A solicitor cannot take a neutral position on a conflict of interest allegation; they must decide whether to continue acting and justify their conduct if challenged, as the court is not the forum for such an inquiry at the discharge stage.
Mcconnell Dowell Constructors (Aust) Pty Ltd v Sembcorp Engineers and Constructors Pte Ltd (formerly known as SembCorp Construction Pte Ltd) [2002] SGHC 8
The right of a beneficiary to make a call on an on-demand bank guarantee depends on the terms of the guarantee itself, not the underlying contract, unless the guarantee stipulates otherwise.
Sim Mui Beng Nancy v Tan Peng Huat Steven [2002] SGHC 79
The court held that where a husband is of advanced age and unemployed, the court may factor the obligation to pay maintenance into the apportionment of matrimonial assets. Furthermore, it is inappropriate for a court to fix the value of matrimonial assets and order a cash payment
Public Prosecutor v Jamal anak Nyalau and Others [2002] SGHC 78
The court sentenced three first-time offenders to six years and six months imprisonment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, noting the absence of weapons and the early guilty plea.
Public Prosecutor v Tiyatun and Another [2002] SGHC 76
The severity of the sentence for a s 304A offence depends to a great extent on the degree of rashness or negligence which was present in the conduct of the accused.
Re Nicholas William Henric QC and another application [2002] SGHC 74
The court dismissed applications for the ad hoc admission of two Queen's Counsel because the cases were not of sufficient difficulty and complexity to warrant such admission, and the applications failed to meet the requirements of s 21 of the Legal Profession Act.
United Lifestyle Holdings Pte Ltd v Oakwell Egineering Ltd [2002] SGHC 73
The court held that the term 'change of the use' in the Option related to HDB's internal criteria for approval and did not entitle the purchaser to apply for a change of use to 'warehousing' which was outside the permitted zoning.