Corporate & Commercial Litigation

We have been instructed on the following notable matters:

• Acted for PDV Marina, one of the state-owned national oil companies of Venezuela in successfully resisting claims of over US$1.8 billion made by global creditors against its assets held in Singapore. These claims arose from various ICC and ICSID arbitration awards secured against the Venezuelan Republic and PDV Marina’s parent company, PDV SA, which these claimants sought to enforce against PDV Marina’s assets in Singapore by arguing that PDV Marina is merely an alter ego or extension of the state. These culminated in the Singapore High Court issuing a landmark decision declining to treat a state-owned entity as an alter ego of the state, because the Court recognised PDV Marina’s corporate functions and separate legal identity from the state. This matter involved complex private international law and cross-border insolvency principles, and was reported in the Global Arbitration Review, with its ramifications widely discussed internationally. 
• Defended the holding companies for a multi-million-dollar group of Jordanian companies against a claim for US$2.6 billion brought by Motorola Credit Solutions, as part of its worldwide effort to enforce a judgement obtained in USA in 2003 against Turkish political dissident Cem Uzan and family. 
• Acted for a Russian party in a multi-party, cross-jurisdictional litigation before the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”) and the Court of Appeal. Sir Vivian Ramsay, IJ presided over the case at first instance. The case involved a joint venture between Singapore and PRC entities to develop a RMB 3 billion Winter Theme Park, with an Olympic-accredited ski slopes and resort project in Shanghai. 
• Represented a global property investment firm and asset manager of a premier shopping mall, in acquiring a rare pre-emptive injunction against an anchor tenant, Singapore’s largest supermarket chain, who refused to vacate the premises upon the expiry of their lease. The tenant’s refusal to vacate the premises would have potentially derailed the sale of the shopping mall for over S$900 million. 
• Represented the subsidiary of the GMR Group (one of India’s leading infrastructure enterprises) which was the main contractor for the reconstruction of the Maldives Airport in its claim for over S$90 million following the sudden termination of the project following the change in the Maldivian political regime. 
• Defended a UHNW Singaporean before the SICC in an action commenced by The Star Casino in Queensland for the recovery of gambling debts of over AUD43 million. Successfully applied to have the action struck out on grounds of public policy. Sir Jeremy Lionel Cooke, IJ accepted that the Civil Law Act proscribed the Singapore courts from facilitating the recovery of monies won on a wager. 
• Acted for Ventureast, one of the longest standing venture capital fund managers in India, managing close to US$325 million in assets, in Singapore Court proceedings. The claims were brought by a digital payments company with a valuation of over US$5.5 billion that is partially owned by Walmart. The case revolves around a dispute over the sale of shares in PhonePe, an India-based technology start-up worth over US$60 million. 
• Acted for an international FMCG principal in the Singapore High Court arising out of a dispute between its subsidiary and a former national-level distributor in Malaysia concerning various claims for breaches of equitable duties of confidentiality, IP infringement and conspiracy. 
• Acted for the China Country Head of Macquarie Bank in substantial claims brought against him and Macquarie Bank by a Chinese SOE. This case is one of the earliest cases litigated before the then nascent SICC. The dispute concerned a commodity swap transaction arising from the ISDA Master Agreement, and involved issues noted by the Court to be “potentially of considerable significance to the derivatives market”. Sir Bernard Eder, IJ granted Singapore Counsel leave to make legal submissions on English Law. 
• Represented an Australian director of an international bank in an SICC suit brought by the bank against the Singapore subsidiary of a Chinese state-owned enterprise involving OTC forward swap contracts valued at US$1.2 million. 
• Acted for the single largest shareholder of Electronic Cash and Payment Solutions (S) Pte Ltd, a start-up offering an integrated financial services technology platform to businesses and consumers in India, in successfully resisting a winding up application brought by an alleged creditor. The Singapore High Court made determinations on novel points of law on the standing of shareholders to resist creditors’ winding up applications. See: Atlas Equifin Private Limited v Electronic Cash and Payment Solutions (S) Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 258. 
• Successfully defended a S$16 million claim in the High Court brought by the liquidator of a company in relation to alleged breaches of directors’ duties. 
• Acted for the founder of a regional real estate group of companies in resisting garnishee orders in respect of joint bank accounts. This matter is noteworthy in being the first case dealing with the question of the party that bears the burden of proving the ownership over the funds in the joint account sought to be garnished. 
• Represented an Australian lawyer in his claim against Resorts World Singapore, for assault, battery and false imprisonment. This is the first known case in Singapore seeking civil damages for intentional torts, including claims for aggravated and exemplary damages. 
• Engaged by Yahoo! Singapore to protect journalists’ privilege not to disclose their sources of information in light of an order by the Singapore Police Force to disclose metadata on their communications with an internet hacker known as ‘The Messiah’. 
• Instructed urgently to act for a multi-national construction corporation against Singapore’s leading business publication in respect of a highly defamatory article concerning the propriety of Ecohouse’s Brazilian property investment schemes that were being marketed in Singapore which caused a loss of investor confidence. The publication removed the offending article and reached a private settlement on terms favourable for our client.