In Diamond Glass Enterprise Pte Ltd v Zhong Kai Construction Co Pte Ltd and another appeal [2022] SGHC(A) 44, the Appellate Division of the High Court had the opportunity to address, among others, the position of the law on liquidated damages in Singapore. In this article, we set out two key points of the decision in respect of the same.
Read MoreUnder the new Rules of Court 2021, Order 12 rule 2 provides that no expert evidence may be used in Court without the Court’s approval, and Order 12 rule 3(2) provides that save in a special case, a party may not rely on expert evidence from more than one expert. So, what happens if a party wants to change the expert? This week, we take a look at the case of University of Manchester v John McAslan & Partners Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2750 (TCC) (“UOM v JMP”) to see how it may shed some light on this issue.
Read MoreIn CUG & 3 Ors v CUH [2022] SGHC(I) 16, Sir Henry Bernard Eder IJ considered whether a legally binding arbitration agreement existed between parties where one party never signed any agreement containing an arbitration agreement.
Read MoreIn this week’s blog, we look at the recent England and Wales Court of Appeal decision of DGL Project & Chartering Ltd v Gemini Ocean Shipping Co Ltd (Re “Newcastle Express”) [2022] EWCA Civ 1555 (“Newcastle Express”), and specifically, on how Males LJ addressed the principle of separability.
Read MoreIn Continental Steel Pte Ltd v Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Southeast Asia Pte Ltd and another [2022] SGHC 292, Dedar Singh Gill J was faced with a dispute between two trade rivals in the steel and construction industry in an action for defamation. We take a look at some of the key points raised.
Read MoreIn Lazarus Century Construction Pte Ltd v SLH Development Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 283, Kwek Mean Luck J considered the nature of documentary evidence required for a party to prove that it provided a loan to another.
Read MoreIn Prem N Shamdasani v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 0920 (“Prem v MCST920”), Goh Yihan JC considered the interaction between s. 37(3), 37(4), 88(1) and 111 of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act 2004 (“BMSMA”), which (in gist) deals with a management corporation’s power to authorize a subsidiary proprietor’s request to effect improvements to his / her lot and remedial provisions.
Read MoreIn Emergent Engineering Pte Ltd v China Construction Realty Co Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 276, Justice Tan Siong Thye dismissed the Respondent’s application to set aside the Adjudication Determination and the consequent Order of Court which enforced the Adjudication Determination. Among others, Tan J held that the Adjudicator’s finding that the payment claim in question was validly served was a determination on the merits which the Court was not entitled to review.
Read MoreIn this blog, we highlight some of the salient points raised in Ser Kim Koi v GTMS Construction Pte Ltd & 2 Ors [2022] SGHC(A) 34 (“SKK v GTMS”) in relation to Cl. 23 SIA Conditions, which addresses extensions of time.
Read MoreIn Atlas Equifin Pte Ltd v Electronic Cash and Payment Solutions (S) Pte Ltd (Andy Lim and others, non-parties) [2022] SGHC 258 (“Atlas Equifin”), Goh Yihan JC (“Goh JC”) held that the shareholder-contributory had standing to challenge the creditor’s winding up application and did so successfully, leading to Goh JC dismissing the winding up application.
Read More
