LITT
Try LITT free
Xu Xiangrong and another v Fu Xianwei and others [2025] SGHC 95
The court held that dispensation of personal service on a foreign defendant does not require prior permission for service out of jurisdiction, provided the service is effected within Singapore. The court also affirmed that Singapore was the natural forum for the dispute given the
City Spark (Singapore) Pte Ltd v The Outdoor Recreation Group, LLC and another [2025] SGHC 25
The court held that Singapore was the appropriate forum for the defamation claim as the key witness was based in Singapore and the governing law was Singapore law.
Le Ninh Tien v Rainbow Forest Enterprises Ltd and others [2025] SGHCR 23
A claimant is not precluded from challenging the jurisdiction of the Singapore courts on forum non conveniens grounds in respect of a counterclaim brought against him in the action he commenced, as a counterclaim is an independent action.
XLV v XLW [2025] SGHCF 35
The court dismissed the wife's appeal against the refusal to stay divorce proceedings, finding that Singapore had a more real and substantial connection to the parties and their children.
The “Sea Justice” [2024] SGCA 32
The loss of security obtained in an in rem action is not a legitimate juridical advantage under the second stage of the Spiliada test where a limitation fund is already available in the appropriate forum.
Tan Wei Heng Kelvin and another v Tok Beng Tong and another [2023] SGHC 352
The court held that Malaysia was the more appropriate forum for the trial of the action, as the underlying subject matter of the oral agreement (a property development project) was located in Malaysia, and the governing law of the agreement was likely Malaysian law.
Mizuho Corporate Bank Ltd v Cho Hung Bank [2004] SGHC 159
The court will refuse a stay of proceedings if the defendant fails to establish that there is another available forum which is clearly or distinctly more appropriate than the Singapore forum.
Yugiantoro v Budiono Widodo [2001] SGHC 349
A defendant seeking a stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens bears the burden of establishing that there is another available forum which is clearly or distinctly more appropriate than the Singapore forum.
Yuninshing v Edward Mondong [2001] SGHC 196
The court affirmed that the Spiliada test for forum non conveniens requires determining the most appropriate forum in the interests of all parties and the ends of justice, noting that the defendant's fugitive status and the advanced stage of proceedings in Singapore weighed again
Kuswandi Sudarga v Sutatno Sudarga [2022] SGHC 299
The court held that in an application for leave to serve out of jurisdiction, the plaintiff must demonstrate that Singapore is the more appropriate forum, and that Stage Two of the Spiliada test applies to such applications.
Raffles Education Corp Ltd and others v Shantanu Prakash and another [2020] SGHC 83
The court dismissed the defendants' application for a stay of proceedings on the grounds of forum non conveniens, finding that Singapore was the natural and appropriate forum as the torts of misrepresentation and conspiracy were in substance committed in Singapore.
Oro Negro Drilling Pte Ltd and others v Integradora de Servicios Petroleros Oro Negro SAPI de CV and others and another appeal (Jesus Angel Guerra Mendez, non-party) [2019] SGCA 74
The court held that Singapore was the appropriate forum for disputes concerning the internal governance of Singapore-incorporated companies, and that directors are bound by the company's constitution upon accepting their appointment.
LE NINH TIEN v RAINBOW FOREST ENTERPRISES LIMITED & 5 Ors
The court held that the appellant failed to show that foreign fora were more appropriate than Singapore for the counterclaim, and thus no stay of proceedings was ordered.
UBS SWITZERLAND AG v KOCH SHIPPING PTE LTD & Anor
The court granted a stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens, finding that Switzerland was the clearly more appropriate forum for the dispute, as the key witnesses were resident there and Swiss law governed the underlying security agreements.
XSG v XSF
The court dismissed the application for a stay of proceedings on the ground of forum non conveniens, finding that Singapore was the forum with the closest and most real connection to the parties, particularly given their bankruptcy status and domicile.
Orchard Capital I Ltd v Ravindra Kumar Jhunjhunwala [2012] SGCA 16
A non-exclusive jurisdiction clause is a factor to be considered in a forum non conveniens analysis but does not automatically make the chosen forum the most appropriate one, especially if the defendant fails to discharge the burden of proving it is clearly or distinctly more app