Singapore Court Judgments
Showing 10 of 9,503 judgments
Tay Lak Khoon v Tan Wei Cheong: Judicial Management, Discounting Creditors' Votes, Removal of Judicial Managers
In Tay Lak Khoon v Tan Wei Cheong, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by Tay Lak Khoon, a creditor of USP Group Limited, challenging the actions of the judicial managers, Tan Wei Cheong and Lim Loo Khoon, in counting votes at a creditors’ meeting. The application sought to disregard votes from USP subsidiaries and Hinterland Group Pte Ltd, declare Resolution 1 invalid, and remove the judicial managers. The court allowed prayers 1 and 2 of the application and dismissed prayers 3, 4, and 5 of the application.
Khan Aisanullah v Rajib Kumar Dhali: Breach of Contract & Fiduciary Duty Claims by Shareholder
In Khan Aisanullah v Rajib Kumar Dhali, the High Court of Singapore addressed claims by Plaintiff Khan Aisanullah against Defendant Rajib Kumar Dhali for breach of an oral agreement and breach of fiduciary duties. The Plaintiff, the sole shareholder of Secur Credentials Logistics & Services Pte Ltd, alleged that the Defendant, a nominee director, improperly removed him as a director, transferred his shares, and misappropriated company funds. The Defendant counterclaimed for unpaid salary and compensation. The court, presided over by Senior Judge Chan Seng Onn, found that the Defendant breached the oral agreement but dismissed the Plaintiff's claim based on the reflective loss principle, which prevents shareholders from claiming for losses that reflect losses suffered by the company. The court also dismissed the Defendant's counterclaim.
Thangarajan Elanchezhian v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction for Outrage of Modesty
Thangarajan Elanchezhian appealed to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore against his conviction and sentence for outrage of modesty under Section 354(1) of the Penal Code. The Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon dismissed the appeal, finding no basis to interfere with the District Judge's decision regarding both the conviction and the sentence. The Appellant was charged with using criminal force against the victim on a bus, and the court upheld the conviction and the six-month imprisonment sentence.
Ler Chun Poh v Public Prosecutor: Appeal on Outrage of Modesty Conviction & Sentencing
Ler Chun Poh appealed to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore against his conviction and sentencing by the District Judge for three charges of outrage of modesty under s 354(1) of the Penal Code. Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah J set aside the original decision due to concerns that the trial judge had substantially adopted the Prosecution’s submissions without providing analysis. The High Court then heard the matter de novo and dismissed the appeal, upholding the original sentence of eight months' imprisonment.
DJK v DJN: Setting Aside Arbitral Award for Apparent Bias in Loan Agreement Dispute
DJK, DJL, and DJM (Claimants) applied to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore to set aside an arbitral award in favor of DJN (Defendant) in an arbitration administered by the SIAC. The arbitration concerned a loan agreement where the Defendant sought repayment of a loan to the first Claimant, guaranteed by the second and third Claimants. The Claimants alleged apparent bias on the part of the Arbitrator. Chua Lee Ming J dismissed the application, finding no reasonable suspicion of bias.
Chia Kok Kee v Tan Wah: Appeal on Statutory Demand in Bankruptcy Proceedings
In Chia Kok Kee v Tan Wah, the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore dismissed Mr. Chia Kok Kee's appeal against a decision to dismiss his application to set aside a statutory demand issued by Mdm Tan Wah. The court found that Mr. Chia's alleged cross claim against Mdm Tan, regarding the disposal of shares in a PRC company, did not raise any triable issues and was an afterthought. The court ordered Mr. Chia to pay indemnity costs.
WVS v WVT: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Custody, Care and Control, and Child Maintenance Dispute
In WVS v WVT, the Appellate Division of the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the Wife against the decision of the Judge of the Family Division regarding the division of matrimonial assets, custody, care and control, and child maintenance. The court dismissed the appeal, save for a correction of a typographical error regarding the valuation of the Teck Whye property. The Wife was ordered to pay the Husband the costs of the appeal fixed at $45,000.
Lim Tion Choon v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Corruption Conviction
Lim Tion Choon (Appellant) appealed to the General Division of the High Court against his conviction by the District Judge for a corruption charge under s 6(b) read with s 29(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The charge alleged that Lim conspired with Wu Yipeng to bribe a marine surveyor. Dedar Singh Gill J allowed the appeal, acquitting Lim due to insufficient evidence to prove the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.
TrueCoin LLC v Techteryx, Ltd: Anti-Suit Injunction & Arbitration Agreement Dispute
In TrueCoin LLC v Techteryx, Ltd, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore granted an anti-suit injunction in favor of TrueCoin, restraining Techteryx from pursuing a court action in Hong Kong. The court found that Techteryx's claims were prima facie within the scope of arbitration agreements between the parties and that there were no strong reasons to deny the injunction. The case involved a breach of contract claim and a dispute over the validity and scope of arbitration agreements in the context of digital currency products and related services. The court's decision was delivered by Justice Andre Maniam on 29 November 2024.
Value Monetization III Ltd v Lim Beng Choo: Contribution Claim Under Civil Law Act
Value Monetization III Ltd (VMIII) and The Enterprise Fund III Ltd (EFIII) filed claims against Ms. Lim Beng Choo in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore, seeking contributions towards a judgment sum of $12,594,646.84 from a prior suit. Ms. Lim denied the claims, arguing that VMIII was precluded from claiming contributions due to remarks in a prior Court of Appeal decision, and that EFIII never paid any part of the judgment sum for which she was liable. She also argued that she should be exempt from making contributions as she was merely a secondary wrongdoer. The court allowed VMIII's claim in full and EFIII's claim in part, ordering Ms. Lim to pay VMIII $3,828,123.25 and EFIII $352,301.62.