LITT
Try LITT free
Public Prosecutor v Mohd Sharif bin Ibrahim [2001] SGHC 237
The court held that the accused had knowledge of the heroin in the briefcase based on the circumstances of the case, and thus failed to rebut the presumption of possession.
Lim Teck Leng Roland v Public Prosecutor [2001] SGHC 234
The High Court, when acting in an appellate capacity, is functus officio once a judgment has been pronounced and signed, and cannot alter or review its own judgment unless there is a specific statutory provision allowing it.
Dr Khoo James and Another v Gunapathy d/o Muniandy and another appeal
The Bolam test, as supplemented by Bolitho, requires that medical expert opinion must satisfy a threshold test of logic to be considered a responsible body of opinion, but the court should not adjudicate between competing respectable medical opinions.
Lim Teck Leng Roland v Public Prosecutor [2001] SGHC 235
The High Court, as an appellate court, has the power to review its own previous order if the order is not a judgment as provided for in s 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Wee Soon Kim Anthony v The Law Society of Singapore (No 4)
The Inquiry Committee has the discretion to determine how to carry out its inquiry, including whether to hear from persons who can shed light on the matter, and is not precluded from making findings on disputed facts if it can do so based on objective evidence.
Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam v Lee Kuan Yew [2001] SGHC 233
An action will not be struck out for want of prosecution for inordinate and inexcusable delay if the limitation period has not expired, unless there is intentional and contumelious conduct or an abuse of process.
Wee Soon Kim v The Law Society of Singapore [2001] SGHC 232
In Wee Soon Kim v The Law Society of Singapore, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of No catchword.
Tan Hock Keng v L and M Group Investments Ltd
The court held that the word 'procure' in the context of the contract imposed a definite obligation to ensure performance, and that extrinsic evidence was admissible to construe an ambiguous limitation clause.
DAEWOO Singapore Pte Ltd v CEL Tractors Private Limited [2001] SGHC 231
In DAEWOO Singapore Pte Ltd v CEL Tractors Private Limited [2001] SGHC 231, the Court of Appeal affirmed the approval of a scheme of arrangement, ruling it fair, reasonable, and bona fide, while confirming no coercion existed against minority creditors.
Tan Chiang Brother's Marble (S) Pte Ltd v Permasteelisa Pacific Holdings Ltd
A single judge of the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction under s 36(1) SCJA to strike out an appeal. Furthermore, 'at the trial' in s 34(2)(a) SCJA refers to the trial, not the appeal.
Koh Kim Eng v Lim Geok Yian [2001] SGHC 230
A constructive trust arises where it would be unconscionable for the legal owner of property to assert their own beneficial interest and deny the beneficial interest of another, particularly where the parties had a clear understanding that the legal owner would relinquish their i
Amran Bin Eusuff & Anor v Public Prosecutor
Entrapment is not a valid defence to a criminal charge in Singapore. A person who voluntarily commits all elements of an offence is guilty regardless of inducement.
The Law Society of Singapore v Lee Cheong Hoh [2001] SGHC 23
A solicitor who pays a commission or gratification to an employee for procuring legal business contravenes s 83(2)(d) and (e) of the Legal Profession Act, regardless of whether the recipient is an employee.
International SOS Pte Ltd v Overton Mark Harold George [2001] SGHC 226
The High Court dismissed the appeal in International SOS Pte Ltd v Overton Mark Harold George, affirming that resisting an interlocutory injunction does not automatically constitute a 'step in the proceedings' that waives a defendant's right to challenge the court's jurisdiction.
Shih Ching Chia James v Swee Tuan Kay
The Court of Appeal held that there was no basis for drawing an adverse inference that the respondent had hidden substantial assets, and set aside the district judge's order requiring the respondent to transfer her interest in the matrimonial home to the appellant.
Ponggol Marina Pte Ltd v Central Provident Fund Board [2001] SGHC 229
In Ponggol Marina Pte Ltd v Central Provident Fund Board, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of No catchword.
Abdul Malik bin Abdul Jamil v Public Prosecutor
The court held that the appellant's statements were made voluntarily and that the medical evidence undermined the appellant's claims of assault. Possession of the drugs was proven, and the presumption under s 17 of the Misuse of Drugs Act applied.
International SOS Pte Ltd v Overton Mark Harold George [2001] SGHC 228
In International SOS Pte Ltd v Overton Mark Harold George, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of No catchword.
Johannes Budisutrisno Kotjo v Ng Wei Teck Michael and Others [2001] SGHC 227
The court held that an employee is not entitled to compensation for unconsumed annual leave unless the employment contract expressly provides for it, and that judicial managers are not personally liable for liabilities incurred before their appointment.
Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc
A foreign judgment is conclusive and cannot be impeached for error of fact or law. It may only be challenged for fraud if fresh evidence is produced that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence and would likely affect the result.
Ponggol Marina Pte Ltd v Central Provident Fund Board (Public Prosecutor) [2001] SGHC 225
The High Court held that ex gratia meal allowances are 'wages' under the CPF Act if they are not genuine expense reimbursements. Since these payments augment an employee's income, employers must make mandatory CPF contributions on them.
Lim Choo Song v Public Prosecutor
The withdrawal of a criminal motion to adduce fresh evidence, where the appellant had admitted possession of the drugs in an affidavit, precludes the appellant from contending that there is doubt regarding the importation of the drugs.
Wan Kamil Bin Md Shafian & Ors v Public Prosecutor
Section 34 of the Penal Code applies to establish joint liability for murder where the act was done in furtherance of a common intention, even if the accused was not physically present at the immediate site of the killing.
The "Neptra Premier" [2001] SGHC 223
The court held that the plaintiffs were not carrying on a money lending business within the contemplation of the Money Lenders Ordinance, and even if they were, it would be inequitable to deny them recovery.