• postimage

    11:57 AM Justin Tan (Sheridan Fellow, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore)

    Policy considerations when interpreting tax statutes: Zhao Hui Fang v Commissioner of Stam Duties [2017] SGHC 105

    What weight should judges give to tax policy considerations when interpreting a tax statute? In Zhao Hui Fang and others v Commissioner of Stamp Duties [2017] SGHC 105 (“Zhao”), the High Court answered, almost in a whisper, “not very much”. In this comment, I summarise the case, demonstrate how the court gave little weight to tax policy considerations and argue for more weight to be given to tax p...

  • postimage

    08:15 AM Kevin Ho Hin Tat (Practice Trainee, WongPartnership LLP) and Ernest Wong Changyan (Practice Trainee, David Lim & Partners LLP)

    Whither punishment and deterrence in contract law? Examining the rejection of punitive damages and its implications on the penalty rule

    Can a person be punished for breaching a contract? What is the role of punishment in contract law? These were difficult issues which the Singapore Court of Appeal (“the Court”) painted as going straight to the “heart of contract law” in PH Hydraulics & Engineering Pte Ltd v Airtrust (Hong Kong) Ltd and another appeal [2017] SGCA 26 (“Airtrust”) (at [1]). The Court held as a general rule that punit...

  • postimage

    09:07 PM Leong Hoi Seng Victor (Justices’ Law Clerk, Supreme Court of Singapore)

    Examining the “special circumstances” test in BLY v BLZ [2017] SGHC 59: when should jurisdictional challenges result in stays of the arbitral proceedings?

    In BLY v BLZ and another [2017] SGHC 59 (“BLY”), the High Court considered a little-considered question arising under section 10(9) of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143, 2002 Rev Ed) (“IAA”). Two parties had gone to arbitration. The tribunal rendered its finding on jurisdiction, which one party then challenged in the High Court. The challenging party invited the Court to exercise its disc...

  • postimage

    07:11 PM Wu Junneng and Tan Tian Hui (Rajah and Tann Singapore LLP)

    Of prima facie standard(s), bare arbitration clauses and constituting arbitral tribunals: KVC Rice Intertrade Co Ltd v Asian Mineral Resources Pte Ltd and another suit [2017] SGHC 32

    A bare arbitration clause is an arbitration clause that does not specify the place or means of appointing arbitrators. It may also not specify the seat of arbitration and in which case, two interesting questions arise. First, how is a Court that has yet to be seized with jurisdiction deal with a request to refer the dispute to arbitration? Second, what is the extent to which the International Arbi...

  • postimage

    02:37 PM Hairul Hakkim (Justices’ Law Clerk, Supreme Court, Singapore) & Kevin Ho Hin Tat (Practice Trainee, WongPartnership LLP)

    Genetic affinity as a novel remedy for wrongful fertilisation – a case of assessing the incalculable? ACB v Thomson Medical Pte Ltd and others [2017] SGCA 20

    In what has been described by the Court of Appeal (“the Court”) as “possibly one of the most difficult” cases thus far, the Court of Appeal held in the decision of ACB v Thomson Medical Pte Ltd and others [2017] SGCA 20 (“ACB v Thomson”) that the parents of a child born out of medical negligence cannot claim as damages the full costs of raising the child (the “no upkeep costs” rule). However, the ...