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 China Medical Technologies, Inc (in liquidation) and another v Wu Xiaodong and another  SGHC 178, the Singapore High Court considered the court's power to grant a Mareva injunction in aid of foreign proceedings. The Court also laid out the threshold requirements for when the Court's power to grant such an injunction would arise, and the factors to be considered in deciding whether to grant the injunction. The Plaintiffs here managed to obtain a Mareva injunction, and were successfully represented by Kelvin Poon, Nigel Pereira and Chew Xiang of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP.
In cross-border commercial disputes, choice of law clauses and jurisdiction clauses are especially relevant, as they bear significant weight in determining the issue of jurisdiction. Shanghai Turbo Enterprises Ltd v Liu Ming  SGHC 172 marks the first instance where the Singapore High Court had to consider the validity of ‘floating’ choice of law clauses and jurisdiction clauses, whereby the proper law or jurisdiction is not determined until a subsequent event. The Defendant in this case was successfully represented before the High Court by Toh Kian Sing S.C., Jared Kok and Chen Zhida of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP.
On 26 June 2018, the Singapore Exchange announced a new listing framework (“Framework”) for issuers with dual class share (“DCS”) structures. The introduction of the Framework has implications on the requirements of the Singapore Code on Take-overs and Mergers (“Code”), in particular, the thresholds for triggering a mandatory offer, and what the ratio of offer values between MV shares and OV shares should be in the event of a take-over or merger transaction.
The Securities Industry Council (“SIC”) is therefore consulting on proposed amendments to the Code to take into account the introduction of the Framework.
On 6 August 2018, the Corporate Governance Council ("Council") submitted its final recommendations on revisions to the Code of Corporate Governance ("Code") to the Monetary Authority of Singapore ("MAS"). The recommendations took into account feedback received after a public consultation in January 2018.
MAS has accepted all the Council's recommendations and has issued the revised Code. Singapore Exchange has also reviewed the Council's recommendations and has made amendments to the Listing Rules.
The revised Code will take effect for companies in respect of annual reports relating to financial years commencing 1 January 2019 onwards.
The revised Listing Rules will also take effect on 1 January 2019 except for revisions relating to the nine-year tenure for independent directors and the requirement for independent directors to comprise at least one-third of the board, which will take effect on 1 January 2022.
While damages for breach of contract are traditionally assessed on the basis of compensating the claimant for their loss, alternative heads of damages have developed in English common law. In Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd v Yeo Boong Hua  SGCA, the Singapore Court of Appeal had the opportunity to consider these novel heads of damages, issuing its first decision on Wrotham Park damages, which are based on formulating a hypothetical bargain between the parties. The 1st to 4th Appellants were represented by Kelvin Poon, Kevin Tan and Alyssa Leong of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, who successfully persuaded the Court against awarding Wrotham Park damages on the facts of the case.