LITT
Try LITT free
Lee Wei Ling and another v Attorney-General [2016] SGHC 239
In Lee Wei Ling and another v Attorney-General, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Contract — Contractual terms, Copyright — Ownership.
Dyna-Jet Pte Ltd v Wilson Taylor Asia Pacific Pte Ltd [2016] SGHC 238
In Dyna-Jet Pte Ltd v Wilson Taylor Asia Pacific Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Arbitration — Agreement, Arbitration — Stay of court proceedings.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Kim Hup [2016] SGHC 237
In Public Prosecutor v Tan Kim Hup, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory offences.
Jeganathan Ramasamy v Public Prosecutor [2016] SGHC 236
In Jeganathan Ramasamy v Public Prosecutor [2016] SGHC 236, the High Court allowed the appeal against conviction, ruling that the Prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court acquitted the appellant, citing significant evidentiary gaps and a lack of motive.
Soh Guan Cheow Anthony v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2016] SGHC 235
In Soh Guan Cheow Anthony v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Appeal, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Disclosure.
Lim Geok Lin Andy v Yap Jin Meng Bryan [2016] SGHC 234
In Lim Geok Lin Andy v Yap Jin Meng Bryan, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Contract — Oral Agreement, Res judicata — Extended doctrine.
Grace Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd v EQ Insurance Co Ltd [2016] SGHC 233
The court held that GC9 of the insurance policy was a condition precedent, and the insured's reckless non-compliance with the Fire Safety Act constituted a breach of this condition, absolving the insurer of liability.
Te Deum Engineering Pte Ltd v Grace Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd [2016] SGHC 232
In Te Deum Engineering Pte Ltd v Grace Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Tort — Negligence, Words and Phrases — "any fire accidentally begin".
CCM Industrial Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Chan Pui Yee [2016] SGHC 231
g JC Counsel Name(s) : Justin Yip Yung Keong and Aw Chee Yao (Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC) for the plaintiff; Cheong Jun Ming Mervyn and Jerrie Tan (Eugene Thuraisingam LLP) for the defendant. Parties : CCM Industrial Pte Ltd (in liquidation) — Chan Pui Yee Insolvency Law – Avoidance of transactions –
Southern Realty (Malaya) Sdn Bhd v Chen Jia Fu Darren (alias Tan Suryo) and others [2016] SGHC 230
In Southern Realty (Malaya) Sdn Bhd v Chen Jia Fu Darren (alias Tan Suryo) and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Stay of Proceedings, Conflict of Laws — Natural Forum.
Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) v PT Humpuss Intermoda Transportasi TBK and another [2016] SGHC 229
In Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) v PT Humpuss Intermoda Transportasi TBK and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil procedure — Striking out, Abuse of process.
Public Prosecutor v Sibeko Lindiwe Mary-Jane [2016] SGHC 228
In Public Prosecutor v Sibeko Lindiwe Mary-Jane, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal procedure and sentencing — Sentencing.
Public Prosecutor v Pham Duyen Quyen [2016] SGHC 227
In Public Prosecutor v Pham Duyen Quyen, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory offences, Criminal procedure and sentencing — Sentencing.
Public Prosecutor v Selamat bin Paki and others [2016] SGHC 226
In Public Prosecutor v Selamat bin Paki and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory offences.
Foo Jee Boo v Foo Jee Seng [2016] SGHC 225
In Foo Jee Boo v Foo Jee Seng, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Land — Sale of land, Trusts — Resulting trusts.
Rosemawati bte Rafdi v Buang bin Ani and others [2016] SGHC 223
In Rosemawati bte Rafdi v Buang bin Ani and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Civil Procedure — Amendments.
Hauslab Design & Build Pte Ltd v Vinod Kumar Ramgopal Didwania [2016] SGHC 222
In Hauslab Design & Build Pte Ltd v Vinod Kumar Ramgopal Didwania, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Building and construction law — Dispute resolution.
Public Prosecutor v BDB [2016] SGHC 221
In Public Prosecutor v BDB, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal procedure and sentencing — Mitigation, Criminal procedure and sentencing — Sentencing.
Yeo Henry (executor and trustee of the estate of Ng Lay Hua, deceased) v Yeo Charles and others [2016] SGHC 220
In Yeo Henry (executor and trustee of the estate of Ng Lay Hua, deceased) v Yeo Charles and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Succession and wills — Testamentary capacity.
Rahimah Bte Mohd Salim v Public Prosecutor [2016] SGHC 219
In Rahimah Bte Mohd Salim v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Revision of proceedings.
Kioumji & Eslim Law Firm and another v Rotary Engineering Ltd and others [2016] SGHC 218
In Kioumji & Eslim Law Firm and another v Rotary Engineering Ltd and others, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Conflict of Laws — Natural forum, Conflict of Laws — Choice of law.
Public Prosecutor v Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh and another [2016] SGHC 217
In Public Prosecutor v Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh and another, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Criminal Law — Statutory offences.
Joseph Ramanathan v Stratech Systems Ltd [2016] SGHC 216
In Joseph Ramanathan v Stratech Systems Ltd, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Employment Law — Pay.
Chng Leng Khim v Public Prosecutor and another matter [2016] SGHC 215
The High Court set aside a conviction after finding the appellant's guilty plea was induced by undue pressure from counsel regarding a potential psychiatric remand. The case clarifies that pleas must be entered voluntarily, free from alarmist advice that deprives an accused of their freedom of choic