LITT
Try LITT free
THE STAR ENTERTAINMENT QLD LIMITED v KHONG YOONG MARK YONG
debt. The Court of Appeal held in Liao Eng Kiat v Burswood Nominees Ltd [2004] 4 SLR(R) 690 (“Burswood Nominees”) that it does not. However, a subsequent Court of Appeal commented, in Poh Soon Kiat v Desert Palace Inc (trading as Caesars Palace) [2010] 1 SLR 1129 (“Desert Palace”), that Burswood
The "Antares V"
in that case that since the claimants’ application for renewal of the writ was commenced and granted before the expiry of the validity of the writ, although after the period of limitation had expired, the defendants did not have any accrued right of limitation. 23 Having reviewed the events chronicl
All Measure Technology (S) Pte. Ltd.
(at [57]) that “the court undertakes a balancing exercise between allowing the applicant the requisite breathing space and ensuring that the interests of creditors are sufficiently safeguarded”. Version No 1: 18 May 2023 (13:17 hrs) Re All Measure Technology (S) Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 148 5 9 In thi
HQH CAPITAL LIMITED v CHEN LIPING
that when an order was made by consent staying an action on terms set out in a schedule to the order, the terms in the schedule were not an order of the court which ought directly to be enforced via proceedings for contempt. The proper course where one of the parties had failed to comply with th
Re: ALAN TANTLEFF
SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS..............................11 RECOGNITION OF THE SINGAPORE ENTITIES’ CHAPTER 11 PROCEEDINGS .......................................................................................14 WHETHER PROCEEDINGS OR ORDERS CONCERNING THE RESTRUCTURING OF A REAL ESTATE I
JANE REBECCA ONG v Estate of LIM LIE HOA ALSO KNOWN AS LIM LE HOA ALSO KNOWN AS LILY ARIEF HUSNI, deceased
with, among others, the respondents in the Applications. 7 While the Deceased Debtor’s will provided that the legal and beneficial title of 16 East Sussex belongs to OSP, this is “subject to the payment of debts, expenses and duties”. As such, since 16 East Sussex is a principal asset of the Es
Rajagopal Muralitharan
Section 12 of the Legal Profession Act 1966 And In the matter of Rule 25 of the Legal Profession (Admission) Rules 2011 And In the matter of Rajagopal Muralitharan GROUNDS OF DECISION [Legal Profession — Admission] Version No 1: 09 May 2023 (15:12 hrs) 1 This judgment is subject to final editorial c
AVIATION HUB PTE LTD v DANIAL HIGGINS
(at [23]) that in effecting the sale, the developer had revoked the licence and breached his agreement not to sell the licensed land. The licensor’s act of selling his title in the land effectively revoked the licence. As such, the effect of Neo Hock Pheng in the present case is that the Licence
WANG FUMIN v CITIBANK SINGAPORE LIMITED
accounts with the defendant include:15 (a) Mr Gerald Teo (“Mr Teo”), a Treasury Service Manager (“TSM”); (b) Mr Ryan Foo (“Mr Foo”), an Assistant Relationship Manager (“ARM”) and (c) Mr Stephen Tay (“Mr Tay”), a Market Manager (“MM”). 8 In March 2019, the plaintiff raised complaints with the defe
The Owners of the Ships or Vessels "Ah Lam II" and "Pu 1804" v The Owners of the Ship or Vessel "Bonito"
The order dated 16 May 1985 did not specify a starting time for the 14 days and it was held that it did not comply with the requirement and the defendants were entitled to an order setting aside the judgment ex debito justitiae. 11. Hitachi Sales was not concerned with a subsequent order extending t
WONG LENG SI RACHEL v OLIVIA WU SU HAN
Respondent JUDGMENT [Civil Procedure — Discovery — Specific Discovery] Version No 1: 29 Jun 2022 (09:47 hrs) This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or
YIONG KOK KONG v LIU CHIEN MIN
that this point was irrelevant to the consideration of whether the court should exercise its powers of sale under s 18(2) read with para 2 of the First Schedule to the SCJA, as s 352(6) of IRDA deals with a matter of distribution of a bankrupt’s estate among the creditors after his assets have b
PONTUS PAAL APPELQVIST v EON REALITY PTE LTD
1) Eon Reality Pte Ltd (2) Eon Reality Inc … Plaintiffs-in-Counterclaim And Pontus Paal Appelqvist … Defendant-in-Counterclaim JUDGMENT [Contract — Breach — Employment contract] [Tort — Negligence — Breach of duty to perform due diligence] Version No 1: 30 Nov 2022 (13:12 hrs) This judgment is subje
CSO v CSP & Anor
under the Letter of Credit) to [the plaintiff] in full. [The first defendant’s] conduct in allowing the Retention Money to be returned to [the plaintiff] in full without objection to the [LC-issuing bank] clearly demonstrates that [the first defendant] accepts that Provisional Acceptance has oc
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Tristan Tan Yi Rui
SUMMARY OF COMMON EVIDENTIAL ISSUES ................................................. 39 THE ELEMENTS OF THE CHARGE ....................................................... 40 THE APPLICABLE LAW ................................................................................... 40 WHETHER POSSESSI
WANG XIAOPU v KOH MUI LEE & 2 Ors
h Keng Meng, Jeremy (Wu Qingming) … Defendants JUDGMENT [Personal Property — Passing of property] [Personal Property — Ownership] [Land — Conveyance] [Trusts — Constructive trusts] [Trusts — Resulting trusts] Version No 2: 20 Sep 2023 (11:04 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Hashim Bin Ismail & 3 Ors
an A/L Kerusnan (3) Azuin Bin Mohd Tap (4) Kumaran Kesawan … Defendants GROUNDS OF DECISION [Criminal Law] — [Statutory offences] — [Misuse of Drugs Act] Version No 2: 13 Jul 2023 (16:32 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..........................................................
BAKER SAMUEL CRANAGE & Anor v SPH INTERACTIVE PTE. LTD. & 4 Ors
ctive Pte. Ltd. (2) Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. (3) Streetsine Technology Group Pte. Ltd. (4) Barakat-Brown, Jason Lewis (5) Fong Yin Leong Leslie … Defendants JUDGMENT [Companies — Oppression — Minority shareholders] [Tort — Conspiracy] [Companies — Directors — Duties] Version No 1: 26 Sep 2022
TAN HUAH SUN v TAN HUAH TAI & Anor
Lay … Defendants GROUNDS OF DECISION [Partnership — Dissolution — Appointment of receiver] Version No 1: 11 Feb 2022 (12:18 hrs) This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publicat
Re: Thomas Haeusler
ter of an Application by Thomas Haeusler … Applicant GROUNDS OF DECISION [Companies] — [Directors] — [Prohibitions] — [Disqualification under s 155A of the Companies Act] — [Application for leave to act as director] [Companies] — [Striking off defunct companies] Version No 2: 09 Sep 2021 (18:17 hrs
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v ANDREW JOHN HANAM
SUMMARY OF THE DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL’S DECISION..............................19 SUMMARY OF THE PARTIES’ SUBMISSIONS IN OA 5.....................23 ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED ..................................................................24 WHETHER THE SECOND AND THIRD CHARGES ARE MADE OUT, AND IF S
JENNIFER TOH SUAT LENG v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
that as a matter of general principle, an offender’s mental condition is relevant to sentencing if it lessens his or her culpability for the offence, therefore justifying a reduced sentence: see Public Prosecutor v Chia Kee Chen [2018] 2 SLR 249 (“Chia Kee Chen”) at [112]. Thus, where an offende
LAGUNA NATIONAL GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB LTD v LIM HOW TECK
on 7 October 2021.12 The notice was issued pursuant to written requests made by noteholders representing more than one-tenth of the nominal amount of the Unsecured Notes outstanding (as required under the Trust Deed). The Company requested that it be allowed to independently verify 8 Ngiam Hai
The Law Society of Singapore v K V Sudeep Kumar & Anor
out to be in charge of the case and was also the person corresponding with the complainant. (c) The respondents put Mr Kumar in a position where he could collect funds from the complainant purportedly on behalf of the Firm. Version No 1: 13 Jan 2026 (16:05 hrs) Law Society of Singapore v K V Sudee