Singapore Court Judgments
Showing 10 of 9,503 judgments
Singapore Medical Council v Ling Chia Tien: Appeal Against Suspension for Medical Misconduct
In Singapore Medical Council v Ling Chia Tien, the Court of 3 Judges of the General Division of the High Court dismissed the Singapore Medical Council's appeal against the disciplinary tribunal's decision to suspend Dr. Ling Chia Tien for 19 months. Dr. Ling faced 32 charges related to inappropriate prescription of benzodiazepines and codeine, failure to refer patients to specialists, and inadequate documentation. The court found the 19-month suspension adequate and not manifestly inadequate, disproportionate, or out of line with precedents.
GIL v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction for Outrage of Modesty of a Minor
GIL appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his conviction in the District Court for outrage of modesty of a minor under section 354(2) of the Penal Code. The victim, a 12-year-old girl, alleged that GIL touched her thigh and vaginal area during a sleepover at his residence. See Kee Oon JAD dismissed the appeal on 6 September 2024, finding the victim's evidence unusually convincing and corroborated by other evidence.
ISU Specialty Chemical Co Ltd v C&D (Singapore) Business Pte Ltd: Contract Formation Dispute
In ISU Specialty Chemical Co Ltd v C&D (Singapore) Business Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore addressed a dispute over the formation of a contract for the sale of Light Cycle Oil (LCO). ISU Specialty Chemical Co Ltd, the claimant, sued C&D (Singapore) Business Pte Ltd, the defendant, for breach of contract, alleging the defendant repudiated an oral contract for the purchase of LCO. The defendant denied the existence of the contract and counterclaimed for legal costs incurred in abortive arbitration proceedings. The court found in favor of the claimant, holding that a contract existed and the defendant was in breach. The defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
Lai Chung Wing v Nusantara Energy: Winding Up Order for Suspended Business
In the case of Lai Chung Wing v Nusantara Energy International Pte Ltd, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore granted a winding-up order against Nusantara Energy International Pte Ltd on November 6, 2024, based on the application of Lai Chung Wing. The court found that the company had suspended its business for a whole year, satisfying the conditions under Section 125(1)(c) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018. The claimant sought the order under ss 125(1)(c) and 125(1)(e) of the IRDA.
WZN v WZM: Child Maintenance, Issue Estoppel, and Material Change of Circumstances
In WZN v WZM, the High Court (Family Division) heard an appeal by the Father against the District Judge's decision regarding the rescission of spousal maintenance and the quantum of child maintenance. The key issues were whether issue estoppel barred the Father from seeking a variation of the child's maintenance and whether there was a material change of circumstances. The court found no issue estoppel, reduced the child's maintenance from $1,200 to $750, and backdated both the rescission of spousal maintenance and the variation of child maintenance to August 16, 2023, the date SUM 2582 was filed.
Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali: Trafficking Diamorphine, Misuse of Drugs Act
In Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore convicted Iswan bin Ali on 6 November 2024 for trafficking diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Iswan was found to be in possession of 51.41g of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking. The court determined that Iswan was not a 'mere courier' under the law because he sourced the drugs and had the ability to set the price. Consequently, the court imposed the mandatory death penalty.
Changi Airport Group v Comptroller of Income Tax: Capital Allowance for Airport Infrastructure
Changi Airport Group (Singapore) Pte Ltd (“CAG”) appealed to the General Division of the High Court against the Comptroller of Income Tax's decision to disallow CAG's claim for capital allowances under Section 19A of the Income Tax Act for capital expenditure on runways, taxiways, and aprons (RTA). The Comptroller argued that the RTA were not 'plant' but 'structures'. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Comptroller's decision and finding that the RTA functioned primarily as a structure, not a plant.
Oghiaanous Khoroushan Shipping Lines Co. v Owner of the vessel “TINA I”: Sanctions Clause in Admiralty Action
In an admiralty action, Oghiaanous Khoroushan Shipping Lines Co. of Kish (Claimant) sued the Owner of the vessel “TINA I” (Defendant) in the General Division of the High Court of Singapore, regarding a collision. The Defendant applied for security to include a sanctions clause, allowing refusal of payment due to US sanctions. AR Navin Anand declined the application, holding that the sanctions clause was not supported by evidence, inconsistent with payment into court, and would result in inadequate security for the Claimant.
WTL v WTM: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Child & Spousal Maintenance, Care & Control
In the Family Justice Courts of the Republic of Singapore, WTL (Husband) appealed against the District Judge's decision regarding care and control of the children and division of matrimonial assets, and maintenance for the children. WTM (Wife) also appealed against the District Judge's decision regarding the division of matrimonial assets and spousal maintenance. The High Court, with Teh Hwee Hwee J presiding, allowed the appeal in part, adjusting the division of matrimonial assets and ordering the husband to refund excess payments for property tax, condominium sinking fund, and management fees. The court dismissed the appeals against the orders pertaining to child maintenance and spousal maintenance.
Tilani v Koedijk: Arbitration Confidentiality & Court's Inherent Powers
The Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Karan Chandur Tilani's application (SUM 28) seeking a sealing order to protect the confidentiality of arbitration proceedings in CA/CA 22/2024 against Mr. Maarten Hein Bernard Koedijk and Gevali Pte Ltd. The court, comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Steven Chong JCA, and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, found that the confidentiality had been compromised by the appellant's prior disclosure of the arbitral award in separate statutory demand proceedings. The court determined that the principle of open justice outweighed the need for confidentiality in this case.