Leading Contract Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore

The High Court dismissed NPS's claim for the deposit and allowed Raffles's counterclaim, declaring the LOI valid and binding at least as to paras 3, 11 and 23, declaring that NPS breached para 3, and…

The District Court allowed the claim in part.

The Tribunal dismissed CPL's claim in full, declined to award its filing fees and other costs items, and made no order as to costs or disbursements in Ms R's favour.

The District Court dismissed the claim.

The High Court allowed the claim and awarded Stamford Land $1,887,946.31 for its legal costs, with costs of the action and interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of judgment.

The District Court dismissed the claimant's claim and allowed the defendant's counterclaim, entering judgment for the defendant for $55,742.47, the undisputed total of the unpaid invoices.

The District Court allowed the claim in part: it ordered Mr Lim to pay Mr Tan nominal damages of $50 for breach of the obligation to restore the account to $10,000 and dismissed the remaining claims,…

The court allowed the claim in part.

Kristy Tan J allowed RA 100 in part.

The High Court dismissed Lim's claim in its entirety.

The District Court allowed the claim in part: it ordered Mr Lim to pay Mr Tan nominal damages of $50 for breach of the obligation to restore the account to $10,000 and dismissed the remaining claims,…

The court allowed the claim, finding Mr Li in breach of a valid and enforceable LOU, and awarded damages of $7,013,157.95, assessed at the date of breach rather than the later date the plaintiffs…

The court allowed the claim in part.

The District Judge allowed the claim in full and ordered the employee to pay the company damages of $119,490.14.

Tribunal Magistrate Jared Kang Chern Wey allowed CPL's claim in part, ordering Ms R to pay CPL $10,200 of the deposit by 28 July 2026 and allowing her to keep $1,000.

The High Court dismissed NPS's claim for the deposit and allowed Raffles's counterclaim, declaring the LOI valid and binding at least as to paras 3, 11 and 23, declaring that NPS breached para 3, and…

The District Court dismissed the claim.

The District Court allowed the claim for breach of contract and entered judgment for the claimant for $164,154 as liquidated damages under cl 5.

The court allowed the plaintiff's claim in part, finding the first and second defendants jointly and severally liable as bailees, and the second defendant liable in contract, for 13 of the 14 cars,…

The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and allowed the defendant's counterclaim in part.

The court allowed the claim, finding Mr Li in breach of a valid and enforceable LOU, and awarded damages of $7,013,157.95, assessed at the date of breach rather than the later date the plaintiffs…

The court dismissed the claim in full, finding that the claimant had not proved that the $27,166 was a loan.

The High Court allowed Arki-Tech's claim in part.

The Appellate Division allowed Mr Kok's appeal and dismissed Mr Yap's appeal in its entirety.

The High Court dismissed CROWN's claim and allowed UNIVEL's counterclaim, but awarded only nominal damages of $1 because UNIVEL had not proven its losses.

The High Court allowed the appeal in part.

The High Court allowed Arki-Tech's claim in part.

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the District Judge's findings that SearchAsia was entitled to the placement fee.

The High Court allowed the application.

The court dismissed both OA 26 and OA 27, holding DMF a party to the charterparty and bound by the arbitration clause, and leaving illegality and public policy to the tribunal.

The High Court allowed the claim and awarded Stamford Land $1,887,946.31 for its legal costs, with costs of the action and interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of judgment.

Tribunal Magistrate Jared Kang Chern Wey allowed CPL's claim in part, ordering Ms R to pay CPL $10,200 of the deposit by 28 July 2026 and allowing her to keep $1,000.

Philip Jeyaretnam J allowed the application in part.

The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal in its entirety and ordered Mr Tantular to pay costs of S$45,000 (all-in), the sum reflecting that the respondent had lost on several issues.

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the striking out of the originating application against all defendants.

The District Court allowed the claim in part.

Sushil Nair J allowed the claim in part.

The court allowed Award's counterclaim in part and rescinded the lease ab initio for Broadley's fraudulent misrepresentation.

The High Court dismissed the remaining plaintiffs' claims in their entirety, finding no fraudulent, negligent or actionable misrepresentation, and held that in any event they had affirmed their SPAs.

Hri Kumar Nair J allowed the claim and entered judgment for Tjandra against Cheng for US$500,000.

The District Court allowed the claim in part: it ordered Mr Lim to pay Mr Tan nominal damages of $50 for breach of the obligation to restore the account to $10,000 and dismissed the remaining claims,…

The High Court dismissed Lim's claim in its entirety.

District Judge Tay Jingxi allowed the claim in part, awarding $13,664.13, made up of $4,314.13 under Invoice 22003 and $9,350 under Invoice 23004.

The High Court allowed Mr Yeo's claim in part: it dismissed the claim against Madam Tan and entered interlocutory judgment for Mr Yeo against Mr Tan for breach of contract, with damages to be…

The High Court dismissed CROWN's claim and allowed UNIVEL's counterclaim, but awarded only nominal damages of $1 because UNIVEL had not proven its losses.

The High Court allowed the claim and awarded Stamford Land $1,887,946.31 for its legal costs, with costs of the action and interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of judgment.

The District Judge allowed the claim in full and ordered the employee to pay the company damages of $119,490.14.

Lee Seiu Kin SJ entered judgment for the claimant for US$803,663.83, being 3% of an enterprise value found to be US$26,788,794.29, well below the sum invoiced, so the claim was allowed in part.

The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal in its entirety and ordered Mr Tantular to pay costs of S$45,000 (all-in), the sum reflecting that the respondent had lost on several issues.

The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and also dismissed the defendant's counterclaim in its entirety.

The High Court allowed the claim and awarded Stamford Land $1,887,946.31 for its legal costs, with costs of the action and interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of judgment.

The court dismissed all of the claimant's claims and also dismissed the insurer's counterclaim.

The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal in its entirety and upheld the dismissal of all three claims.

The court dismissed Mr Lorinet's claims.

The court dismissed Mr Glassberg's claim for damages and interest in full, finding against him on authority, contract, tort, the Unfair Contract Terms Act and vicarious liability.

The High Court allowed the claim, finding that the sums were loans that had to be repaid, and held that $321,116.40 was outstanding and due to the claimant.

The High Court dismissed all of the claimant's claims and ordered him to pay the defendant's costs on the standard basis, to be taxed unless agreed, with liberty to apply for a different order.

The court allowed the claim, finding Mr Li in breach of a valid and enforceable LOU, and awarded damages of $7,013,157.95, assessed at the date of breach rather than the later date the plaintiffs…

The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's claim and allowed the defendant's counterclaim in part.

Hoo Sheau Peng J allowed Shengwang's claim and entered judgment for CNY1,885,630.00, with interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of writ to judgment.

The court allowed the claim in part: Kopigi was liable only for wrongful termination, and Reformd was awarded nominal damages of S$500, its porosity and expediency claims failing.

The District Court allowed the claim in part: it ordered Mr Lim to pay Mr Tan nominal damages of $50 for breach of the obligation to restore the account to $10,000 and dismissed the remaining claims,…

Wong Li Kok, Alex JC dismissed the claimant's claims, holding the summary dismissal valid.

The Appellate Division allowed both appeals in part.

Lee Seiu Kin J allowed the claim in part.

The court allowed the claim, finding Mr Li in breach of a valid and enforceable LOU, and awarded damages of $7,013,157.95, assessed at the date of breach rather than the later date the plaintiffs…

The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal.

The High Court allowed Rashmi's counterclaim in part and entered judgment for her for US$71,321,679.83, with interest at 5.33% a year from the date of the originating claim until judgment.

Chan Seng Onn SJ dismissed KST's claim against the estate and, as a result, the estate's claims against the three third parties.

Wong Li Kok, Alex JC dismissed the claimant's claims, holding the summary dismissal valid.

The court allowed the claims in part.

The District Court dismissed all of the claimant's claims against the second defendant, and directed the parties, failing agreement on costs, to file costs submissions within 14 days.

The High Court dismissed the remaining plaintiffs' claims in their entirety, finding no fraudulent, negligent or actionable misrepresentation, and held that in any event they had affirmed their SPAs.

Mohamed Faizal JC dismissed the claim in full against both defendants, and directed submissions on costs if costs were not agreed.

Lee Seiu Kin J allowed the claim in part.

The Appellate Division dismissed FSH's appeal and allowed SGI's appeal in part.

The tribunal allowed the claim in part.

The court found both parties in breach and allowed each side's claims in part.

The Court of Appeal (Sundaresh Menon CJ, Tay Yong Kwang JCA and Steven Chong JCA) allowed the appeal.

The Appellate Division allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment below.

The High Court allowed the claim and awarded Stamford Land $1,887,946.31 for its legal costs, with costs of the action and interest at 5.33% per annum from the date of judgment.

The court dismissed Mr Lorinet's claims.

Hri Kumar Nair J allowed the claim and entered judgment for Tjandra against Cheng for US$500,000.

The High Court (See Kee Oon JAD) dismissed all of Mr Budhrani's claims, finding no undue influence, duress, misrepresentation, breach of contract or breach of a duty of care, and dismissing the…

Mavis Chionh J dismissed Auto Lease's appeal in its entirety and revised the damages payable to Mr Toh upwards to $49,867, with interest on the revised sum.

The court allowed the claim, finding Mr Li in breach of a valid and enforceable LOU, and awarded damages of $7,013,157.95, assessed at the date of breach rather than the later date the plaintiffs…

The High Court allowed Ethoz's claim against Dr Sin under the Deed of Guarantee and dismissed his counterclaim, with costs to be heard separately.

The High Court dismissed the claimants' claims against Madison for fraudulent misrepresentation and for negligent misrepresentation.

The High Court allowed Oan's claim for breach of the investment agreement and awarded him $4,700,524.24, with interest at 5.33% per annum under the Civil Law Act from 13 December 2023, the date the…

Lai Siu Chiu SJ dismissed the plaintiff's claim.

The Appellate Division dismissed FSH's appeal and allowed SGI's appeal in part.

The court found both parties in breach and allowed each side's claims in part.

The court allowed UOB's claim against Maersk for breach of the contracts of carriage evidenced by the bills of lading and granted judgment for US$39,372,300.00 with interest at 5.33% per annum from…

Lee Seiu Kin J allowed the claim in part.

The Appellate Division allowed the appeal in part.

The Magistrate's Court allowed the claim, entering judgment for Huttons for $28,080, being $26,000 plus the then-prevailing GST, dismissed the defendant's counterclaim, and directed written…

The District Court allowed the claim, finding on a balance of probabilities that the $72,400 was a loan repayable by 7 August 2016.

The High Court allowed the application.

The High Court dismissed WDL's application, holding that the gaming equipment on board was covered by KfW's mortgage.

The High Court dismissed the claim, finding that the plaintiff had proved neither the oral undertaking nor that the written documents were a sham, and that the undertaking would in any event have…

The High Court dismissed NPS's claim for the deposit and allowed Raffles's counterclaim, declaring the LOI valid and binding at least as to paras 3, 11 and 23, declaring that NPS breached para 3, and…

The court dismissed all of the claimant's claims and also dismissed the insurer's counterclaim.

The court dismissed EBS's claims and allowed GT's counterclaim in full: EBS was ordered to pay US$182,087.20 with contractual interest at 2% per annum and 1.5% per month, both compounded monthly, on…

The Assistant Registrar dismissed the striking out application in its entirety, finding that the Defendants had not established any of the grounds for striking out.

The Tribunal dismissed CPL's claim in full, declined to award its filing fees and other costs items, and made no order as to costs or disbursements in Ms R's favour.

The High Court dismissed the claim in its entirety.

The High Court discharged both interim injunctions granted ex parte in SUM 229 on 29 January 2024, setting them aside.

The High Court dismissed Summons No 3619 of 2023 and refused all the interim injunctions, including the springboard injunction.

The court allowed the claim in part: Kopigi was liable only for wrongful termination, and Reformd was awarded nominal damages of S$500, its porosity and expediency claims failing.

The District Court allowed the claim for breach of contract and entered judgment for the claimant for $164,154 as liquidated damages under cl 5.

The High Court (Vinodh Coomaraswamy J) allowed the tenants' claim in part and the landlord's counterclaim in part.

The court allowed the claimant's application and entered summary judgment for him, with damages for the defendant's breach to be assessed by the Registrar.

The High Court dismissed the claim in its entirety, finding that the claimants had not proved breach of the founding agreement, misrepresentation or minority oppression on a balance of probabilities.

The court allowed the claim in part: Mr Lim's claim in debt against the temple succeeded and his claims against Mr Goh were dismissed.

Goh Yihan J allowed the appeal in part.

The High Court dismissed the son's claim, finding that he had not proved the alleged oral agreement on a balance of probabilities.

The High Court allowed the claim, finding that the sums were loans that had to be repaid, and held that $321,116.40 was outstanding and due to the claimant.

The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal in its entirety, leaving in place the dismissal of the claim and the judgment on FCStone's counterclaim.

Philip Jeyaretnam J allowed the claim in OC 301.

Tribunal Magistrate Jared Kang Chern Wey ordered that both the claim and the counterclaim be transferred to the Magistrates' Court.

Philip Jeyaretnam J allowed both appeals, set aside the judgment below, and ordered a re-trial on Mr Liau's draft amended defence and counterclaim, with permission to join his wife and the CPF Board.

The High Court allowed Compass's claim in part.

The court allowed Award's counterclaim in part and rescinded the lease ab initio for Broadley's fraudulent misrepresentation.

The High Court dismissed the remaining plaintiffs' claims in their entirety, finding no fraudulent, negligent or actionable misrepresentation, and held that in any event they had affirmed their SPAs.

Lee Seiu Kin J allowed the claim in part.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part.

The High Court (Vinodh Coomaraswamy J) allowed the tenants' claim in part and the landlord's counterclaim in part.

Mavis Chionh J dismissed Auto Lease's appeal in its entirety and revised the damages payable to Mr Toh upwards to $49,867, with interest on the revised sum.

The District Court allowed the claim in part.

The High Court allowed SECC's appeal and set aside the District Judge's orders.

S Mohan J found that QA was contractually bound as seller and that the transactions were genuine trade financing, not shams or moneylending, but held that Amberwork had not proved that QA failed to…

Chan Seng Onn SJ dismissed Mr Chan's claim and allowed Mdm Sin's counterclaim for $578,000.

The court dismissed both Originating Claim No 226 of 2024 and Originating Claim No 468 of 2023 in their entirety, finding the Goldciti engagement genuine and no implied term or directly owed duty in…

The High Court dismissed the claim, finding that the plaintiff had proved neither the oral undertaking nor that the written documents were a sham, and that the undertaking would in any event have…