Case Update: A M Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11

A M Mohamud (in substitution for Mr A Mohamud (deceased)) v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11

Significance: the UK Supreme Court held that an employer was vicariously liable for its employee’s act of causing injury to a customer under the close connection test.

Comment: this decision is significant because under previous applications of the doctrine of vicarious liability, an employer will not be held liable for an employee’s acts which were on his whim and frolic, outside the course of employment, or were unauthorised acts. In this case, the Court extended the analysis of unauthorised modes of authorised acts by the employer to an irrational physical attack as falling within the authorised act of an employee’s interactions with a customer.

Continue reading “Case Update: A M Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11”

March 6, 2016

Case Update: Nava Bharat (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Straits Law Practice LLC and another and another appeal [2016] SGCA 12 – SGCA dismisses negligence claim against lawyer re advice on cross-border transaction

Significance: Singapore Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s solicitors had not been negligent in advising on the legal implications of the plaintiff proceeding with the cross-border transaction to acquire an interest in an Indonesian coal mine based on an oral undertaking given by a 3rd party to obtain a forestry licence.

Continue reading “Case Update: Nava Bharat (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Straits Law Practice LLC and another and another appeal [2016] SGCA 12 – SGCA dismisses negligence claim against lawyer re advice on cross-border transaction”

February 27, 2016February 27, 2016

MOM calls for public feedback on Employment Claims Tribunal

The current Labour Court under the Employment Act only covers workers who earn less than $4,500 per month regarding their salary disputes. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is considering establishing the ECT to expand this scope to include all employees (except public servants, domestic workers and seafarers for the time being). The detailed proposal can be found here. The public has until 23 March 2016 to give feedback.

Continue reading “MOM calls for public feedback on Employment Claims Tribunal”

February 27, 2016February 27, 2016

Tropical Forestry Venture Investment Scam: How to Obtain Recompense?

I read the Straits Times report “Investors cry foul over tree investments gone wrong” (25 February 2016) with sadness. My heart goes out to the many investors who put in their savings and hard earned money into the scam. In short, investors put in money into a Tropical Forestry Venture(S) Pte Ltd to invest in valuable tree saplings. Turns out to be a scam. The people behind the company disappeared with the cash. But what can be done for these investors to seek justice?

Continue reading “Tropical Forestry Venture Investment Scam: How to Obtain Recompense?”

February 25, 2016February 27, 2016

“Do more to protect higher-skilled workers: NTUC”

Do more to protect higher-skilled workers: NTUC, Straits Times (25 February 2016)

HR and employment matters can turn very ugly when employees are terminated, retrenched or dismissed. Anger and bitterness resulting in potential long-drawn disputes and litigation can actually be avoided if employers and HR professionals apply the fundamental Golden Rule to employees who are being asked to leave.

Unions offer a form of protection and support. Legal counsel is an even more important way because then one would know what the legal rights are and how to negotiate for a fair and peaceable outcome for all.

February 19, 2016February 19, 2016

Case Update: Chng Weng Wah v Goh Bak Heng [2016] SGCA 09 – SGCA clarifies and applies law on order for account and equitable defence of laches

Case Update: Chng Weng Wah v Goh Bak Heng [2016] SGCA 09 – Singapore Court of Appeal clarifies and applies law on order for account and equitable defence of laches

Significance: Singapore Court of Appeal clarifies law on order for account under equity and equitable doctrine or defence of laches.

Continue reading “Case Update: Chng Weng Wah v Goh Bak Heng [2016] SGCA 09 – SGCA clarifies and applies law on order for account and equitable defence of laches”

February 19, 2016February 19, 2016

Case Update: Sim Yong Teng and another v Singapore Swimming Club [2016] SGCA 10 – SGCA rules on breach of natural justice due to bias and prejudgment by management committee of a private association

Case Update: Sim Yong Teng and another v Singapore Swimming Club [2016] SGCA 10

Significance: Singapore Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and held that the trial judge should have disqualified all six members of a management committee from hearing a complaint against the appellant on the ground that they had prejudged the complaint against him, and that the administrative law principle of necessity had no application in the circumstances of the case. The Court opined that, as a matter of law, the principle of necessity is not applicable to private associations such as the respondent club but only to public bodies. Private associations may always change their rules if necessary without having to breach the rules of natural justice in any disciplinary proceedings against any of their members.

Continue reading “Case Update: Sim Yong Teng and another v Singapore Swimming Club [2016] SGCA 10 – SGCA rules on breach of natural justice due to bias and prejudgment by management committee of a private association”

February 18, 2016February 18, 2016

Case Update: HT S.R.L. v Wee Shuo Woon [2016] SGHC 15 – clarifying confidentiality, privilege & admissibility

HT S.R.L. v Wee Shuo Woon [2016] SGHC 15

Significance: Singapore High Court holds that privileged & confidential emails obtained by a hacker and leaked onto WikiLeaks retain the protection of privilege & confidentiality. Court ordered for emails to be expunged from the defendant’s affidavits.

Continue reading “Case Update: HT S.R.L. v Wee Shuo Woon [2016] SGHC 15 – clarifying confidentiality, privilege & admissibility”

February 17, 2016February 19, 2016

The Straits Times Opinion: Why a Constitutional Commission to review the Elected Presidency?

My Straits Times Opinion Article

I wrote an OpEd for the Straits Times, “Why a Constitutional Commission to review the Elected Presidency?”, explaining the background to the recently appointed Constitutional Commission, which is only the 2nd one since independence. The previous one was in 1966.

I opined on why the PAP Government did so when it had never found the need for it regarding all its constitutional amendments since 1966. I suggest the new political context where a PAP Government-backed candidate may plausibly lose the vote. This is amidst the backdrop of societies and voters moving further left in economic policies and also rising sensitivities as regards ethnic-religious minorities.

Update: make submissions to the constitutional commission

Submit in writing, signed, by 21 March, 5 PM. There may be public hearings for clarification and elaboration.

Submissions can be in Malay, Chinese, Tamil or English and need to be typed or legibly written by hand. The submissions must also be signed, whether in hardcopy or PDF form.

The precise dates of the public hearings will be announced in due course, but these will likely take place over a limited number of days between April 18 and May 15, 2016.

The submissions must be addressed to the Constitutional Commission Secretariat, and sent by post to 1, Supreme Court Lane, Singapore 178879, or e-mail to CCSecretariat@supcourt.gov.sg.

February 15, 2016February 15, 2016

Article: Proper Plaintiff Rule and No Reflective Loss Principle

In company law, what’s the proper plaintiff rule and the no reflective loss principle? Why is it said that only the company can bring claims regarding corporate wrongs? Can the shareholder ever do so?

Continue reading “Article: Proper Plaintiff Rule and No Reflective Loss Principle”