In the decision of Tan Hock Keng v Malaysian Trustees Bhd and another matter [2021] SGHC(A) 18, the Appellate Division of the High Court dismissed the appeal to set aside the registration of a consent judgment granted in Malaysia on the basis that there was no “appeal” within the meaning of Section 3(2)(e) of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act (Cap 264, 1985 Rev Ed) (“RECJA”).
Read MoreIn the recent decision Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd & Anor v Grafik Architects Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2948 (TCC), the Technology and Construction Court dismissed an application made to strike out the claim as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim and/or because it is an abuse of process. The Court found that although there was need for further particularisation on some issues, the Particulars of Claim clearly disclosed a cause of action and reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.
Read MoreIn the recent England and Wales Technology and Construction Court (“TCC”) decision of Mansion Place Ltd v Fox Industrial Services Ltd [2021] EWHC 2972 (TCC) (“Mansion v Fox”), the TCC made some observations concerning liquidated damages.
Read MoreIn Doo Wan Tsong Charles and others v Oxley Jasper Pte Ltd and another [2021] SGHC 249 (“DWT x Oxley”), the Singapore High Court held that a mistake by one party as to the nature or quality of a contractual term does not justify rectification of the contract.
Read MoreIn Glenville, Chantell v Quek Swee Chong and another [2021] SGHC 237, the High Court held that the Writ of Summons which expired on a Saturday, a non-working day, was validly served on the following Monday, which was the next working day.
Read MoreIn Nambu PVD Pte Ltd v UBTS Pte Ltd [2021] SGCA 98 (“Nambu v UBTS”), the Court of Appeal dealt with when a contract may be “supplemented” by additional terms pursuant to a previous course of dealing between the parties or by way of incorporation by reference.
Read MoreIshan Anoop Sakraney v Ameet Nalin Parikh and another matter [2021] SGHC(A) 12 concerned an appeal from the decision of the High Court. The dispute turned on whether, on a proper construction of Clause 4.2 of the contract in question, a party who completed his obligations within the relevant period was only entitled to be paid upon the other party’s receipt of the sale proceeds.
Read MoreIn Saxo Bank A/S v Innopac Holdings Limited [2021] SGHC 214 (“Saxo v Innopac”), the High Court upheld a decision to strike out the defendant’s defence and counterclaim and to enter judgment for the plaintiff due to the defendant’s repeated failures to comply with its discovery obligations, including those subject to an “unless order”
Read MoreIn an ex tempore judgment, the Court of Appeal in Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co, Ltd and another v HTL International Holdings Pte Ltd and others [2021] SGCA 87 dismissed the Shareholders’ appeal to displace the discretion exercised by the Company’s judicial managers in choosing to sell the asset in question to the first respondent instead of another prospective buyer.
Read MoreIn the recent High Court decision of Mah Kiat Seng v Attorney General Chambers & 2 Ors [2021] SGC 202 (“Mah Kiat Seng”), the High Court dealt with the issue of whether video recordings that were made by and belong to the government could be withheld from discovery and production.
Read More
