LITT
Try LITT free
NICOLAS ROBERT ADAM ROHRLACH v QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED & Anor
s Airways Limited (2) Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd … Defendants ORAL JUDGMENT [Contempt of Court] — [Civil contempt] [Contempt of Court] — [Sentencing] — [Principles] Version No 1: 03 Dec 2021 (16:26 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ..........................................................
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v OOI OON TAT
disciplinary tribunal (“DT”) held that the Charges against the respondent were made out on the evidence. It described the respondent’s conduct as a “contumelious and repeated failure” to keep his client informed of the state of progress of his suit. It also observed that the respondent’s “inactio
KUA SWEE LIN v HO KIM YAN & Anor
Gu and the GMP Proceeds are currently held by Hor’s solicitors in the conveyance. 5 Lin and Hor maintain that the Flat is held by Hor and Ho on a resulting or constructive trust for Mdm Ng. Ho denies the said trust. It is her case that Mr Kua had gifted the Flat to Hor, and Hor had thereafter gi
PATRICK MICHAEL KELLY v CLICKS2CUSTOMERS PTE LTD & 3 Ors
SUMMARY OF THE PLAINTIFF’S CASE.................................................4 SUMMARY OF THE DEFENDANTS’ CASE ...........................................10 FURTHER DIRECTIONS AND ARGUMENTS SOUGHT .....................14 THE DECISION................................................................
CHELSEA TAN YAN QI v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
that where it is unambiguously clear that an offender cannot pay a fine, the fine should not be imposed even though the court would have preferred to impose a fine rather than a short term of imprisonment (at [13]). In such circumstances, the court should recognise the reality that the offender
HO SOO TONG & 2 Ors v HO SOO FONG & 2 Ors
Certainty of intention to create a trust: Summary of findings ....................................................................................... 45 An express trust in favour of the Plaintiffs ............................................... 45 ISSUE 4: WHETHER THERE WAS A COMMON INTENTION C
KOH CHEW CHEE v LIU SHU MING & Anor
Contract — Breach] [Contract — Formation — Oral contracts] [Contract — Misrepresentation — Fraudulent] [Contract — Remedies — Damages — Measure of damages] [Contract — Remedies — Account of profits — AG v Blake] [Damages — Measure of damages — Contract — Expectation damages] [Damages — Measure of
Tan Poh Cheng v Kwan Wei Beng
that in these circumstances, the flat had no market value. She also noted that the wife would not be in a financial position to keep the flat and assume the mortgage loan of over $200,000. In fact the wife had not even asked for this. Neither could the husband retain the flat because he did not have
DAVID CHEONG HONG MENG v IRENE SIM & Anor
her 50% shareholding on his behalf.2 3 With David’s and Irene’s cash contribution, GWL acquired three more cars. Subsequently, 34 more cars were acquired by GWL with funds from entities related to Aloysius or one Andrew Sim (“Andrew”) used to purchase some of these cars. Whether GWL beneficially
NG KUAN CHUAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
no capital apart from that deposited by Investors. As such, when Investors who joined the Singliforex scheme earlier sought to cash out their “trading gains”, the withdrawals were funded using the capital deposited by the Investors who joined the scheme later.14 The DJ thus found that Singlifore
LEE KIM SONG v CHAN CHEE KIEN & Anor
held singly or jointly by the two defendants. He seeks the return of funds loaned, or alternatively, beneficial ownership in the various properties as a result of either a resulting trust or a common intention constructive trust. The first defendant (“Mr Chan”) is the husband of Mr Lee’s sister.
ZAITON BINTE ADOM v NAFSIAH BTE WAGIMAN & Anor
the divorce proceedings in abeyance to allow the plaintiff an opportunity to apply to intervene in the divorce proceedings and to assert a claim.34 26 In September 2018, the first defendant secured directions to permit the divorce proceedings to continue35 on the basis that the plaintiff had fai
SERENE TIONG SZE YIN v CHAN HERNG NIENG
Chua J’s decision to dismiss Ms Tiong’s claim, finding that Ms Tiong’s claim was “wholly unmeritorious”. The parties’ cases Ms Tiong’s case Medical negligence 24 Ms Tiong’s primary claim is that Dr Chan, as her de facto doctor, owed her a duty of care to ensure that she would not be addicted
SYED SUHAIL BIN SYED ZIN & 16 Ors v ATTORNEY GENERAL
Bin Ibrahim (4) Norasharee Bin Gous (5) Nazeri Bin Lajim (6) Rosman Bin Abdullah (7) Roslan Bin Bakar (8) Masoud Rahimi Bin Merzad (9) Zamri Bin Mohd Tahir (10) Fazali Bin Mohamed (11) Rahmat Bin Karimon (12) Ramdhan Bin Lajis (13) Jumaat Bin Mohamed Sayed (14) Muhammad Faizal Bin Mohd Shariff (15)
PARASTATE LABS, INC. v WANG LI & 3 Ors
– like there were with the cryptocurrency Parastate had invested with Babel Asia? The fact that Parastate did not have any financial statements was a poor excuse for Mr Chen not disclosing the worth of Parastate’s assets. Parastate and Mr Chen must have known what Parastate’s assets were worth (a
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v SYN KOK KAY
in Law Society of Singapore v Low Yong Sen [2009] 1 SLR(R) 802 (“Low Yong Sen”) (at [38]): The test [for overcharging] is an objective one as determined by his peers of integrity and reasonable competence, having regard Version No 1: 10 Jan 2023 (11:52 hrs) Law Society of Singapore v Syn Kok Kay
The "Feng Hang and Others"
dismissed at the first instance, but on appeal, the Guangdong High Court held in its favour on 16 July 1999. While this was going on, the plaintiffs took steps to dispose of the ore when they did not receive payment from TNW. They were hampered in their efforts because of the uncertainty over their
The "Pacific Vigorous"
applied for summary judgment against the defendant, Pacific Vigorous Shipping Inc, for the misdelivery of the cargo at the port of discharge otherwise than against production of the relevant bills of lading covering the subject cargo. I allowed Agritrade’s appeal with costs and entered interlocutory
SIMRAN BEDI v MARK A MONTGOMERY
in his name, at a 10% discount. The purchase price was therefore US$270,000, or US$3.285 per 7 AB at p 293. 8 AB at p 40–41. 9 Plaintiff’s Closing Submissions dated 11 October 2021 (“PCS”) at para 23; Defendant’s Closing Submissions dated 11 October 2021 (“DCS”) at p 3, para 6; Defendant’s Re
SA'ADIAH BINTE JAMARI v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
UDGMENT [Criminal Law — Offences — Causing hurt by means of poison with intent to commit an offence] [Evidence — Admissibility of evidence] Version No 3: 29 Jul 2022 (08:40 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................
HSU HSUEH HUI @ JENNY HSU v FOONG YOOK KOOI & 3 Ors
and detained by the defendants; (d) damages in the sum of $4,229.05 (pro-rated for occupancy for the period 18 to 22 May 2019) being monies paid to secure the release of her belongings; 26 SOC at pp 19–21. Version No 1: 13 May 2022 (09:07 hrs) Hsu Hsueh Hui v Foong Yook Kooi [2022] SGHC 108 11 (
CZV v KANAGAVIJAYAN NADARAJAN T/A KANA & CO
summary determination on a point of substantive law. A striking out application is not the correct procedure for that. 5 Returning to the first ground, even if I agree with Ms Chuah that the WhatsApp message is inadmissible, I do not think that Mr K’s statement of claim discloses no reasonable ca
SEAN WONG WAI LOONG
al Profession Act 1966 And In the matter of Rule 25 of the Legal Profession (Admission) Rules 2011 And In the matter of Sean Wong Wai Loong Sean Wong Wai Loong … Applicant AND Admission of Advocates and Solicitors 121 of 2022 Summons No 3008 of 2022 In the matter of Section 12 of the Legal Profes
ED&F Man Capital Markets Limited v STRAITS (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD.
in Dorsey at [69] that the courts’ powers under para 12 of the First Schedule to the SCJA do not extend to the ordering of pre-action interrogatories in aid of proceedings beyond Singapore. The same principles would underlie applications for pre-action discovery: see Dorsey at [25]. Version No 1: