eOASIS is Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP's legal information website for clients, containing business and legal information prepared from a practitioner's viewpoint. It has four different modules, updated regularly, and materials range from commentaries on the latest legal developments to key legal and business information.
In Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another v Public Prosecutor  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 of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP were instructed as counsel for the Accused in this matter.
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.
This Client Update examines what organisations need to take into consideration when structuring their Grievance Reporting, Investigative and Disciplinary (GRID) processes, considers the effects of situations where GRID processes have failed or are inadequate and suggests steps that organisations can take to mitigate litigation and reputation risk, as well as exposure to regulatory sanction.
Schemes of arrangement are often the preferred option for companies seeking to restructure their debt. In Pathfinder Strategic Credit LP and another v Empire Capital Resources Pte Ltd and another appeal  SGCA 29, the Singapore Court of Appeal had to consider, among other things, the extent of disclosure that is required of the applicant company in a scheme process, as well as issues concerning the validity of third party releases, classification of debtors and abuse of process. This Update provides a summary of the key aspects of the Court's decision.
In Kok Yin Chong and others v Lim Hun Joo and others  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 of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP.