Business relationships and transactions are usually based on contracts, and nothing is as binding on a party as signing on the dotted line. We would expect legal obligations to follow the signee. However, there are instances where signatures can be „disguised‟ or forged. In the case of The Bank of East Asia Limited v Sudha Natrajan [2015] SGHC 328, the Court had to decide whether the signature on a contract was indeed executed by the Defendant, or a forgery as alleged by the Defendant.
CLIENT UPDATE 2016 FEBRUARY 1 © Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP Key Legislative and Regulatory Developments in Singapore for the Year 2015 This Update provides a brief summary of the key statutory and regulatory developments in Singapore for the year 2015.
In Chan Siew Lee Jannie v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2016] SGCA 23, the Singapore Court of Appeal was faced with the issue of whether a statutory demand issued to a guarantor would be deemed defective and liable to be set aside if it did not include the details of a pledge given by the principal debtor.
Financial Services Regulatory Singapore Client Alert May 2016 MAS Issues Proposed Enhancements to Resolution Regime for Financial Institutions in Singapore Background In June 2015, the Monetary Authority of Singapore ("MAS") issued a consultation paper on the Proposed Enhancements to the Resolution Regime for Financial Institutions in Singapore ("June 2015 Consultation Paper").
When goods are delivered to a professional storage operator (we will refer to them as a warehouseman) for safe keeping, they may become subject to a lien. A lien is a security right which gives the warehouseman rights over the goods that can take precedence over the rights of others, including the owner. The warehouseman is entitled to exercise the lien when he or she is left unpaid for services rendered and in so doing will gain legal control over the goods.
Assenagon Asset Management S.A. v Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited (formerly Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Limited) [2012] EWHC 2090 (Ch)
The Singapore High Court in Re Lehman Brothers Finance Asia Pte Ltd (in creditors' voluntary liquidation) [2012] SGHC 190 was confronted with the issue of whether debts of a company in a currency other than Singapore Dollars which are admitted in proof by its liquidators should be converted at the exchange rate prevailing on the date on which the company's statutory declaration was lodged, or on the date of the passing of the resolution placing the company in liquidation.
This table provides an overview of the key developments in 2012 to date.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (Amendment) Bill ("MAS Bill") and the Financial Institutions (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill ("FI Bill") were tabled before Parliament on 4 February 2013.
The companies at the heart of these two cases were Jurong Technologies Industrial Corporation Ltd ("JTIC") and its wholly owned subsidiary Jurong Hi-Tech Industries Pte Ltd ("JHTI") (collectively, the "Companies").