LITT
Try LITT free
Automatic Controls and Instrumentation Pte Ltd v Tan Thiam Soon and another [2017] SGHC 77
In Automatic Controls and Instrumentation Pte Ltd v Tan Thiam Soon and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Tort — Conspiracy, Tort — Conversion.
Wartsila Singapore Pte Ltd v Lau Yew Choong and another suit [2017] SGHC 76
In Wartsila Singapore Pte Ltd v Lau Yew Choong and another suit, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Agency — Principal, Contract — Contractual Terms.
Singapore Medical Council v Ang Peng Tiam [2017] SGHC 75
In Singapore Medical Council v Ang Peng Tiam, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil procedure — Affidavits - Appeals to High Court from court, tribunal or person.
Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd v DealStreetAsia Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 74
Pre-action disclosure requires the applicant to show that the order is both necessary and just, with necessity assessed by whether the plaintiff lacks sufficient knowledge to fashion a viable claim.
Sakae Holdings Ltd v Gryphon Real Estate Investment Corp Pte Ltd and others (Foo Peow Yong Douglas, third party) and another suit [2017] SGHC 73
In Sakae Holdings Ltd v Gryphon Real Estate Investment Corp Pte Ltd and others (Foo Peow Yong Douglas, third party) and another suit, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Companies — Directors, Companies — Oppression.
Centre for Laser and Aesthetic Medicine Pte Ltd v Goh Pui Kiat and others [2017] SGHC 72
In Centre for Laser and Aesthetic Medicine Pte Ltd v Goh Pui Kiat and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Contract — Contractual terms, Equity — Fiduciary relationships.
Public Prosecutor v Lam Leng Hung and other appeals [2017] SGHC 71
In Public Prosecutor v Lam Leng Hung and other appeals, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Criminal conspiracy, Criminal Law — Offences.
Wayne Burt Commodities Pte Ltd v Singapore DSS Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 70
In Wayne Burt Commodities Pte Ltd v Singapore DSS Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Summary Judgment.
Sulastri bte Achmad v Tan Hee Hang and another [2017] SGHC 7
In Sulastri bte Achmad v Tan Hee Hang and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Damages — Compensation and Damages.
Peh Hai Yam v Public Prosecutor [2017] SGHC 69
In Peh Hai Yam v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory Offences.
Technigroup Far East Pte Ltd and another v Jaswinderpal Singh s/o Bachint Singh and others [2017] SGHC 68
In Technigroup Far East Pte Ltd and another v Jaswinderpal Singh s/o Bachint Singh and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Contempt of court — Civil contempt, Contempt of court — Sentencing.
Public Prosecutor v Alagesan Nathan and another [2017] SGHC 67
In Public Prosecutor v Alagesan Nathan and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal procedure and sentencing — Sentencing.
United Overseas Bank Ltd v Pereira, Dennis John Sunny and another [2017] SGHC 66
In United Overseas Bank Ltd v Pereira, Dennis John Sunny and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil procedure — Stay of execution, Credit and security — Guarantees and indemnities.
Public Prosecutor v Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another appeal [2017] SGHC 65
In Public Prosecutor v Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another appeal, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Offences, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Trials.
BC Andaman Co Ltd and others v Xie Ning Yun and another [2017] SGHC 64
In BC Andaman Co Ltd and others v Xie Ning Yun and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Anti-suit Injunction.
Hapsuwan Sakon v CT Civil Construction Pte Ltd and another [2017] SGHC 63
In Hapsuwan Sakon v CT Civil Construction Pte Ltd and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Tort — Negligence.
TT International Ltd v Ho Lee Construction Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 62
Clause 31.4(2) of the PSSCOC exhaustively sets out the sums recoverable upon termination for convenience, and does not permit the recovery of loss of profits for uncompleted work.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Kah Ho and another [2017] SGHC 61
In Public Prosecutor v Tan Kah Ho and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory offences.
Antariksa Logistics Pte Ltd and others v Nurdian Cuaca and others [2017] SGHC 60
In Antariksa Logistics Pte Ltd and others v Nurdian Cuaca and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Striking out, Res judicata — Extended doctrine.
iHub Solutions Pte Ltd v Freight Links Express Logisticentre Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 6
In iHub Solutions v Freight Links Express [2017] SGHC 6, the High Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim for substantial damages, awarding only $100 in nominal damages. The court ruled that the plaintiff failed to prove causation and failed to provide timely notice of its mitigation expenses.
BLY v BLZ and another [2017] SGHC 59
In BLY v BLZ and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Stay of arbitral proceedings.
Millennium Commodity Trading Ltd v BS Tech Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 58
In Millennium Commodity Trading Ltd v BS Tech Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Bills of exchange and other negotiable instruments — Conflict of laws, Bills of exchange and other negotiable instruments — Delivery.
Sit Kwong Lam v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 2645 [2017] SGHC 57
In Sit Kwong Lam v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 2645, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Land — Strata titles.
Ochroid Trading Ltd and another v Chua Siok Lui (trading as VIE Import & Export) and another [2017] SGHC 56
The court held that the agreements were loan contracts within the scope of the Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 1985 Rev Ed) and were unenforceable as the plaintiffs were unlicensed moneylenders.