SG Courts

In Sapura Fabrication Sdn Bhd and others v GAS and another appeal, the Court of Appeal held that it would have upheld an order granting the respondent a carve-out from the automatic stay arising from the recognition of the reorganisation proceedings of Sapura Fabrication Sdn Bhd and Sapura Offshore Sdn Bhd (the “Sapura Entities”) as foreign main proceedings, but for the appellants’ withdrawal of their appeals against the carve-out order. The carve-out permitted the respondent to continue arbitration proceedings against the Sapura Entities. Read more: go.gov.sg/2025sgca13

In Republic of Korea v Mason Capital LP and another and another matter [2025] SGHC(I) 9, the Singapore International Commercial Court dismissed the claimant state’s application to set aside an investor-state arbitral award on either jurisdictional or natural justice grounds. First, the state’s objections (a) that there were no “measures adopted or maintained” by the state “relating to” the investor, and (b) that the investor lacked standing, were not jurisdictional in nature. The investor had submitted to arbitration a claim alleging facts that could be properly characterised as “measures adopted or maintained” by the state “relating to” the investor which resulted in loss to it. Next, the claimant state’s objection that the defendant was not an “investor” was jurisdictional in nature, but the defendant was an “investor”. Finally, the tribunal’s refusal to admit or consider admitting two pieces of additional evidence were reasonable case management decisions that did not prejudice the claimant state. Read more: go.gov.sg/2025sghci9

Any member of the public may attend open court hearings in the Supreme Court or State Courts. To ensure a smooth hearing, check out some of the dos and don'ts that we should observe in this edition of #YourGuidetoAttendingCourt video series. (4/5) Catch video: go.gov.sg/gtac4

We are delighted to announce the appointment of Judicial Commissioner Sushil Sukumaran Nair, effective from 1 April 2025. Judicial Commissioner Nair brings 35 years of legal experience, having previously served as Deputy Chief Executive Officer of Drew & Napier LLC. His expertise and leadership have been widely recognised, including being named a Hall of Fame member by Asia Pacific Legal 500, and as a Global Elite Thought Leader by Who’s Who Legal. Judicial Commissioner Nair is also known for his key role in conceptualising the framework of and drafting the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill, which was passed in parliament in April 2020. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gn_Ry-GJ.

In CIX v DGN [2025] SGCA 10, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against the decision of the General Division of the High Court dismissing the appellant’s claims for being an abuse of process and for failing on the merits. Read more: go.gov.sg/2025sgca10

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Korea, Jo Hee-de, hosted The Honourable the Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon at the Supreme Court of Korea on 11 Mar. At the meeting, the Chief Justices reflected on the progress made since the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding in 2020 to promote the efficient administration of justice in the respective jurisdictions, and explored avenues to further deepen bilateral judicial ties. Read more: go.gov.sg/cjsmsckmar2025

In Re Fullerton Capital Ltd (in liquidation) [2025] SGCA 11, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and granted (a) recognition of the British Virgin Islands liquidation of Fullerton Capital Ltd (“Fullerton”) as a foreign main proceeding under the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency as adopted in Singapore and (b) relief to the respondents in the form of a disclosure and examination order against the appellant, a former director and shareholder of Fullerton. Read more: go.gov.sg/2025sgca11

Discover your way around the courtroom and know what to do during a hearing in this episode of #YourGuidetoAttendingCourt video series. (3/5) Catch video: go.gov.sg/gtac3

In W Power Group EOOD v Mingyang Wind Power (International) Co Ltd [2025] SGHC(I) 7, the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) allowed most of the costs claimed by the defendant, who was previously successful in striking out the Statement of Claim of the claimant. Taking reference from Appendix G of the Supreme Court Practice Directions 2021 (“Appendix G”), the SICC reduced the costs claimed for the period before the case was transferred to the SICC from the General Division of the High Court. In the post-transfer period, the court, even if not limited by Appendix G, will still consider if the costs are reasonably incurred. The SICC found that, in this case, the costs for (a) case management work, (b) seeking and providing further and better particulars, and (c) engaging Hong Kong counsel were not entirely reasonable. It limited the costs claimed by the defendant for those categories, and awarded full costs on the remaining claims. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gfgBrp6A

In J. G. Jewelry Pte Ltd v Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt Ltd and others and other appeals [2025] SGHC(A) 5, the AD partially allows two sets of appeals. The first concerns the liability of a Singapore company to Indian suppliers for the supply of diamonds and jewellery; the second involves claims for minority oppression and breach of fiduciary duties against the shareholders and directors of the Singapore company. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gz78XENv