The Ministry of Law (“MinLaw”) is conducting a public consultation on key recommendations made in a final report by the Insolvency Law Review Committee ( the “Committee”) in relation to Singapore’s personal and corporate insolvency regimes. The public consultation period runs from 7 October 2012 to 2 December 2013.
Alvin Yeo SC and Melvin Lum acted for the Second Intervener, Thomas Chan, in his claim for $3,275,935.81 as interest for the late completion of the sale of a property ("Property").
The liquidators of the plaintiff Dynasty Line Ltd. ("Dynasty") brought proceedings against the first defendants ("Sia") and second defendant ("Lee") for breaches of duty owned to Dynasty while they were its directors.
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.
Beluga Chartering GmbH (in liquidation) & Ors v Beluga Projects (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation) & Anor (deugro (Singapore) Pte Ltd, non-party) [2014] SGCA 14
The theory of universality in insolvency, along with globalisation, has gained much traction across many jurisdictions in recent years. Briefly, the universality theory proposes that an insolvency proceeding has worldwide effect over all the assets of the insolvent company, wherever they may be.
Introduction
When an unregistered foreign company becomes insolvent in both its place of incorporation and in Singapore, should its assets in Singapore be remitted to the foreign liquidator or be held in Singapore to satisfy locally incurred liabilities first? This was the question that the Singapore Court of Appeal faced in Beluga Chartering GmbH (in liquidation) and others v Beluga Projects (Singapore) Pte Ltd (in liquidation) and another (deugro (Singapore) Pte Ltd, non-party) [2014] SGCA 14.
Facts
On 6 May 2014, the Ministry of Law ("MinLaw") issued its response to the feedback received from the public consultation on the final report (the "final report") of the Insolvency Law Review Committee (the "Committee") in relation to proposed recommendations affecting Singapore's personal and corporate insolvency regimes.
Singapore’s Court of Appeal has just laid down guidance on how professionals should approach their fee engagements with clients.1 The judgment reveals an expectation of strict adherence to the terms of the letter of engagement. It also serves as an admonishment to retain a detailed inventory of the work done.
Background
As part of the Singapore Budget 2013, the Ministry of Law has proposed a major review of Singapore's bankruptcy and insolvency regime, with a particular focus on making it easier to discharge personal bankruptcies due to business failure or unsecured consumer credit.
The Insolvency Law Reform Committee will also be finalizing its report on the Omnibus Insolvency Bill soon. This Bill is intended to address certain perceived weaknesses in the existing personal bankruptcy and corporate insolvency mechanisms, resulting in a better and more efficient regime.