|
|
The Singapore International Commercial Court ("SICC") has issued its first judgment dealing with arbitration proceedings. In BXS v BXT [2019] SGHC(I) 10, the SICC faced an application to set aside an arbitral award, as well as an application to strike out the setting aside application on the ground that the three-month time limit had expired. The SICC issued a judgment that confirmed that the three-month time limit was mandatory, and also dealt with whether the SIAC's appointment of a sole arbitrator in expedited proceedings was a grounds for challenge when the parties had agreed to three. The Defendant was successfully represented by Paul Tan, Alessa Pang and David Isidore Tan from the International Arbitration Practice on instructions by Allen & Overy.
Click here to read our client update.
In Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another v Public Prosecutor [2019] SGCA 21, a five-member Singapore Court of Appeal quashed the conviction of a Defendant accused of importing Madagascan Dalbergia rosewood logs, valued in excess of $70 million into Singapore without a permit. This was a rare instance of a successful criminal reference. In reaching its decision, the Court examined the purpose and operation of the Endangered Species Act, providing guidance as to when goods would be considered to be "in transit". Murali Pillai, Paul Tan and Jonathan Lai from the Commercial Litigation Practice and International Arbitration Practice were instructed as counsel for the Accused in this matter.
Click here to read our client update.
In Kok Yin Chong and others v Lim Hun Joo and others [2019] SGCA 28, the Singapore Court of Appeal considered an application for the collective sale of a development, exploring the potential grounds of objection to such an application. The High Court had allowed the Respondent collective sale committee members' application, and the Court of Appeal here upheld the decision. Notably, the Court examined the issue of good faith in the context of the collective sale regime in Singapore, including which party bore the burden of proving good faith. The Respondents were successfully represented by Adrian Wong and Ang Leong Hao from the Commercial Litigation Practice.
Click here to read our client update.
In BWF v BWG [2019] SGHC 81, the Singapore High Court grappled with the applicable legal standard for determining whether an injunction restraining a winding-up should be granted in circumstances where the underlying claim is prima facie arbitrable – ought the standard to be that of a bona fide prima facie dispute, or that of a triable issue? After assessing contrasting approaches in earlier High Court cases, the Court here found in favour of the Plaintiff, holding that the applicable standard is that of a bona fide prima facie dispute. The Plaintiff was successfully represented by Kendall Tan and Ting Yong Hong from the Shipping & International Trade Practice.
Click here to read our client update.
On 22 May 2019, the Personal Data Protection Commission ("PDPC") published the following guides:
- Guide to Managing Data Breaches 2.0; and;
- Guide on Active Enforcement (collectively, the Guides")
In particular, the Guide to Managing Data Breaches sets out the expectation of the PDPC for each organisation to have a suitable Data Breach Management Plan, that will assist the organisation in dealing with data breaches, as well as the thresholds of a data breach upon which the data breach would need to be notified to the PDPC and/or the data subject. Organisations must therefore ensure that they have such a Data Breach Management Plan in place.
The issuance of the Guides sets the stage for the introduction in Singapore of a mandatory data breach notification regime.
Click here to read our client update.
On 7 May 2019, changes to the Protection from Harassment Act (Cap. 256A) ("Act") were passed in Parliament. Significantly, the amended Act expressly provides that companies fall within the ambit of the Act, which subject them to liability for, amongst others, causing harassment, alarm or distress, as well as for 'doxxing' – a new offence prohibiting acts of publishing information about a victim's identity to harass, threaten or facilitate violence against the victim. The Act also introduces enhanced protection for victims of harassment and falsehoods. This Update provides a summary of the key changes to the Act.
Click here to read our client update.
Please note that whilst the information in this Update is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only
intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as a substitute for specific professional advice.
|
|
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP
9 Straits View
Marina One West Tower
#06-07
Singapore 18937
Republic of Singapore
http://sg.rajahtannasia.com
Contacts: Francis Xavier, SC, PBMPartnerD +65 62320551francis.xavier@rajahtann.comChia Kim HuatPartnerD +65 62320464kim.huat.chia@rajahtann.comHoward CheamPartnerD +65 62320685howard.cheam@rajahtann.com| Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of legal practices based in Asia. |
Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local legal requirements. Services provided by a member firm are governed by the terms of engagement between the member firm and the client. |
This update is solely intended to provide general information and does not provide any advice or create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on this update. |
|
|
