Category: Law

Posted on

Insights into the Honourable Justice Chan Seng Onn

Singapore Law; Legal; Lawyer

Justice Chan Seng Onn was the judge who acquitted the foreign domestic worker Ms Parti Liyani of stealing items allegedly belonging to a Karl Liew.

In this piece, I set out some interesting facts about, and insights from, Chan J extracted from an interview with him done by some students several years ago.

Did you know that he was a top A level student along with George Yeo and Teo Chee Hean; he was a President’s Scholar and studied and worked as an engineer before switching mid-career to law?

Continue reading “Insights into the Honourable Justice Chan Seng Onn”

Posted on

Case: Paulus Tannos v Heince Tombak Simanjuntak and others [2020] SGCA 85 – majority of Court of Appeal refused recognition of foreign bankruptcy order due to breach of natural justice

Singapore Law; Legal; Lawyer

Significance: In a rare split decision, the majority of the Court of Appeal (Sundaresh Menon CJ and Tay Yong Kwang JA; Woo Bih Li J dissenting) refused recognition of foreign bankruptcy order due to breach of natural justice.

The majority found that the evidence did not prove that:

(i) notices of the bankruptcy application in Indonesia were properly served on the appellants;

(ii) the appellants had actual knowledge of the bankruptcy proceedings but chose not to appear in them.

The appellants were thus deprived of the opportunity to challenge validity of service or liability under the guarantees and object to the making of the bankruptcy orders.

The Court left open the issue of the correctness of the legal principles on recognition of foreign bankruptcy orders: at [22].

Supreme Court case summary found here.

Continue reading “Case: Paulus Tannos v Heince Tombak Simanjuntak and others [2020] SGCA 85 – majority of Court of Appeal refused recognition of foreign bankruptcy order due to breach of natural justice”

Posted on

Case: Sandy Island Pte Ltd v Thio Keng Thay [2020] SGCA 86 – defects liability clause does not extinguish rights to claim damages in common law

Singapore Law; Legal; Lawyer

Significance: Singapore Court of Appeal held that unless there are clear words or strong implication from express words in the contract, a defects liability clause in a property construction or development contract does not cause the owner/employer to lose its right to claim damages at common law for defects.

Continue reading “Case: Sandy Island Pte Ltd v Thio Keng Thay [2020] SGCA 86 – defects liability clause does not extinguish rights to claim damages in common law”

Posted on

Case: Public Prosecutor v Jurong Country Club and another appeal [2019] SGHC 150 – High Court considers factors to determine whether employee or independent contractor

Significance: Singapore High Court considers factors to determine whether a person was engaged as an employee or independent contractor for purposes of the Central Provident Fund Act (CPFA).

Continue reading “Case: Public Prosecutor v Jurong Country Club and another appeal [2019] SGHC 150 – High Court considers factors to determine whether employee or independent contractor”

Posted on

Case: Timing Ltd v Tay Toh Hin [2020] SGHC 169 – High Court holds that joint bank account may be garnished

Significance: Singapore High Court held that a joint bank account may be subject to a garnishee order under Order 49 of the Rules of Court. Where there is a strong prima facie basis for concluding that all the moneys in a joint account belong to the judgment debtor, the joint account can be garnished, subject to certain requirements.

Continue reading “Case: Timing Ltd v Tay Toh Hin [2020] SGHC 169 – High Court holds that joint bank account may be garnished”

Posted on

Case: Lim Suk Ling Priscilla and another v Amber Compounding Pharmacy Pte Ltd [2020] SGCA 76 – multifactorial balancing for lifting Riddick principle; guidance on search orders (Anton Piller)

Singapore Law; Legal; Lawyer

Lim Suk Ling Priscilla and another v Amber Compounding Pharmacy Pte Ltd [2020] SGCA 76

Significance: Singapore Court of Appeal held that a multifactorial balancing exercise is to be adopted in determining whether a party ought to be released from its Riddick undertaking not to use documents ordered to be disclosed in civil proceedings for collateral purposes. The previous two-step test in Beckkett Pte Ltd v Deutsche Bank AG [2005] 3 SLR(R) 555, viz. inter alia prejudice as overriding factor, is not to be applied.

Search orders (or Anton Piller orders) should be targeted and specific in their reach; the breadth of search orders should be carefully calibrated to meet the needs of the discovering party only, and no further.

Continue reading “Case: Lim Suk Ling Priscilla and another v Amber Compounding Pharmacy Pte Ltd [2020] SGCA 76 – multifactorial balancing for lifting Riddick principle; guidance on search orders (Anton Piller)”