eOASIS HOME  
LEGAL UPDATES  
NEWSBYTES
REGIONAL ROUND-UP
AUTHORED PUBLICATIONS
RTA COVID-19 RESOURCE CENTRE
ARBITRATION ASIA
 
 
 

Legal Updates

Legal Updates for June 2018

Singapore Court of Appeal Issues Decision on Quantification of Damages
Commercial dispute practitioners know that it is not enough that a claimant prove that a breach of contract has occurred; claimants have to go further and quantify the losses that they have suffered. That legal principle was at the centre of the Singapore Supreme Court’s decision in Biofuel Industries Pte Ltd v V8 Environmental Pte Ltd [2018] SGCA 28, an important case clarifying the evidential threshold to be met by claimants when quantifying their losses. Here, the damages awarded against the defendant were successfully reduced to a nominal sum. The defendant was represented by Jared Kok of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, assisted by Jared Dass.

Singapore Court Rejects Application to Adjourn Enforcement Proceedings Pending Setting Aside Challenge in Arbitral Seat
In Man Diesel & Turbo SE v I.M. Skaugen Marine Services Pte Ltd [2018] SGHC 132, the Singapore High Court considered whether it should adjourn proceedings to enforce an arbitral award pending the determination of proceedings challenging the award in Denmark, being the seat of the arbitration. It is understood that this is the first time the Singapore Court has elaborated on the test to be applied when dealing with an application for adjournment and a cross-application for security. Danny Ong, Yam Wern-Jhien and Annabelle Teo of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP successfully represented the Plaintiff in these proceedings.

The Duties of an Adjudicator in a SOPA Payment Claim Dispute
In Comfort Management Pte Ltd v OGSP Engineering Pte Ltd [2018] SGCA 19, the Singapore Court of Appeal set out to better define the role of the adjudicator in the SOPA process, including the scope of his duties in an adjudication, and the matters which he has to consider in making a determination. The Court also considered the situation where the respondent does not file a payment response, asking whether the respondent is precluded from challenging the payment claim before the adjudicator, and whether the adjudicator must automatically find in favour of the claimant.

2021: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D | 

2020: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D | 

2019: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D | 

2018: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D | 

2017: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D | 

2016: 
J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |