Browse

This chapter considers the choice of law rules for contractual obligations under Singapore law, which is closely similar to the equivalent choice of law rules under English common law. It starts with the process of identifying the proper law of the contract as the proper law of the contract plays a key role in most of the issues relating to choice of law for contractual obligations. Additionally, illegality and the operation of public policy influence the substantive obligations of parties under the contract. For example, a contract which is illegal under the proper law of the contract would not be enforced by the Singapore court. The chapter also tackles the choice of law rules for the formation, material validity and formal validity of a contract, and the capacity to contract. It explores the enactment of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods into the Singapore law that provides uniform rules for the international sales of goods.

This chapter discusses the choice of law rules for inter vivos dealings involving proprietary rights, with particular attention being paid to the application of the rules in commercial transactions. It notes how choice of law process begins with the exercise of characterization, which involved distinction between immovables, tangible movables and intangible movables. The insusceptibility of the general choice of law rule (lex situs) to change primarily roots to its deference to the ultimate control which the courts of the situs have over the property and the apparent certainty for all parties concerned. There are, however, signs that the general applicability of this rule may be reconsidered under Singapore law. The chapter also tackles the voluntary assignments of debts and instances of involuntary assignment.

This chapter explains how Singapore's choice of law rule for torts largely reflects the English common law rule of double actionability. As a general rule, the tort choice of law rule requires actionability under the lex fori and actionability under the law of the place where the wrongful act was committed. This general rule is subject to a flexible exception which may be invoked to apply the law that has the most significant relationship to the parties and the occurrence. It then examines possible reforms for the double actionability rule and the possible issues surrounding torts, such as the relevance of party autonomy, internet defamation and the interrelation between contract and tort choice of law issues.

This chapter explores the choice of law rules for three legal categories: unjust enrichment, equitable obligations and trusts. Under Singapore domestic law, restitution is recognised as an umbrella topic where different causes of action may give rise to a restitutionary remedy, which is assessed with reference to the defendant’s gain. The Singapore Court of Appeal accepted a two-fold classification of the subject revolving around restitution for unjust enrichment and restitution for wrongs. According to some scholars, the third branch of the law of restitution is proprietary restitution which involves situations where the claimant seeks a proprietary remedy, such as where it is alleged that property is impressed with a resulting or constructive trust. The chapter then elaborates on the choice of law rules for trusts, including the inter vivos express trusts. It also considers the choice of law rule for equitable obligations such as breach of fiduciary duties.

This chapter looks into some general choice of law issues that underpin the choice of law process. It explains the limit of the claimant’s ability to control the law governing its claim, which primarily revolves around pursuing non-contractual causes of action in an attempt to escape from a contractual choice of law. The court must engage in a three-stage process of characterisation endorsed by the Singapore Court of Appeal to determine the applicable law. The chapter then considers whether certain matters are substantive or procedural in nature, such as limitation statutes and the doctrine of legal professional privilege. It explains that Singapore courts have not dealt with the incidental question in commercial cases, and it is unclear if international harmony or internal consistency should be prioritized for this concept.

This chapter covers the choice of law issues involving corporations. It looks into the provisions of the Companies Act 1967 which addresses foreign-incorporated companies and the re-domiciliation of foreign-incorporated companies under Singapore law. Lex incorporationis or the law of the place of incorporation governs questions such as whether the corporation exists or who has the right to sue in the name of the corporation. Moreover, this law also handles issues of corporate governance and the internal management of a company. The chapter also elaborates on the choice of law rule governing the piercing of the corporate veil.

This chapter explicates the corporate insolvency and restructuring regime in line with the applicable jurisdiction and choice of law rules in Singapore. It explains that Singapore is in an ideal spot to position itself as a cross-border insolvency and restructuring hub, especially when the nation is one of the leading financial centres regionally and globally. The Singapore court will recognize foreign insolvency and restructuring proceedings and offer assistance for the foreign proceedings under both the common law and the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. The chapter also examines the cross-border issues considered concerning corporate insolvencies and bankruptcies. It recognizes the establishment of the Judicial Insolvency Network as part of the proactive attempts of the Singapore judiciary to elevate Singapore’s status as an international insolvency and restructuring hub.

This chapter introduces the concept of private international law in Singapore. Singapore's private international law’s burgeoning phase is largely driven by the government’s desire to position the nation as the centre of choice for the resolution of international commercial disputes, international insolvency, and restructuring efforts. The chapter then provides a brief overview of the commercial aspects and significant developments in Singapore’s private international law rules. It tackles the establishment of the Singapore International Commercial Court, Singapore International Mediation Centre, and Singapore International Arbitration Centre in an effort to offer a complete suite of dispute resolution services for international commercial disputes. Moreover, these developments also affected the field of jurisdiction and foreign judgments.

This chapter focuses on the civil jurisdiction of the Singapore courts. It elaborates on the jurisdiction of the general division of the Singapore High Court. The effect of the establishment of the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) is that some jurisdictional regime rules of the General Division of the High Court are pushed aside when the case is to be heard in the SICC. On the other hand, the enactment of the Choice of Court Agreements Act (CCAA) resulted in the displacement of the jurisdictional rules of both the General Division and the SICC. The chapter explains that the reform of service out of jurisdiction rules (found in the Rules of Court 2021) signal a marked change in the attitude towards taking extraterritorial jurisdiction over foreign defendants in modern international litigation. It also looks into the new terminology under the Rules of Court 2021.

This chapter expounds on the anti-suit injunction, Mareva injunction, and search order as the three types of protective measures that may be granted by the General Division of the Singapore High Court. An anti-suit injunction is an in personam order addressed to the respondent concerning continuing foreign proceedings. Meanwhile, the Mareva injunction, also known as a freezing order, is an in personam order directed against a defendant to prevent the defendant from dissipating assets before a judgment. The search order or Anton Piller order, on the other hand, imposes an obligation on the respondent to allow persons to enter its premises and search, inspect, seize and retain documents or other types of moveable property. The chapter discusses the principles relating to each type of relief, with primary focus on whether the General Division of the Singapore High Court and the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) has jurisdiction to grant these measures.

This chapter discusses the four regimes for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Singapore. The regimes include the Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act 1921 (RECJA), the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act 1959 (REFJA), the Choice of Court Agreements Act 2016 (CCAA), and the common law rules. The chapter considers the RECJA and REFJA which are modelled on common law rules. The Singapore government's concerted efforts to liberalize its foreign judgment rules resulted in the enactment of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements to enhance the enforceability of Singapore International Commercial Court judgments in other countries. This chapter briefly looks at the Hague Judgments Convention which employs indirect rules on jurisdiction and sole grounds on which a foreign judgment may be refused recognition or enforcement. The chapter also covers the grant of an injunction against the enforcement of a foreign judgment and the enforcement of international mediated settlement agreements through the Singapore Convention on Mediation.

This chapter discusses the historical foundation and modern developments of the Singapore legal system to elaborate on the Singapore private international law developments. It highlights the efforts of the Ministry of Law of Singapore and the Singapore judiciary in capacity and reputation building. The progressive developments and innovations within the Singapore judicial system primarily focus on promoting the development of Singapore’s jurisprudence and the influence of the Singapore legal system internationally. Moreover, the end goal revolves around whether the international business community would choose Singapore as the dispute resolution forum and Singapore law as the governing law of transactions. The chapter also looks into the recent innovations and developments in the Singaporean judiciary involving the Singapore International Commercial Court, the appellate review capacity of the Supreme Court of Singapore, and international judicial relations.