Court : Singapore Supreme Court
V K Rajah JA (delivering the grounds of decision of the court): 1. These grounds relate to an appeal against the decision ("the DC Decision") of the Disciplinary Committee ("the DC") of the Singapore Medical Council ("the Respondent"), which found Dr Pang Ah San ("the Appellant") guilty of professional misconduct for performing a loop Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ("loop-PEG") procedure on one Mdm Goh Lee Kheng ("the Patient"). The DC held that the treatment was not generally accepted by the profession outside the context of a formal and approved clinical trial, and that the Appellant had breached Clause 4.1.4 of the Singapore Medical Council's Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines ("the ECEG") ("Clause 4.1.4"). We affirmed this decision. 2. This appeal raises some important issues relating to the use of innovative medical treatment in Singapore. When will offering innovative treatment without prior regulatory approval under the current regulatory regime be permissible? How does th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Singapore Supreme Court
Jean Chan Lay Koon AR. 1. This judgment concerns two separate applications. Sum 5740/2013 is the plaintiff's application for summary judgment to be entered against all five defendants under O 14 r 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 332, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) ("Rules of Court"). Sum 424/2014 is the defendants' application for the Plaintiff's claim against the 4th and 5th defendants to be struck out under O 18 r 19(1). Background facts 2. The plaintiff is a private company incorporated in Mauritius. It was set up as a special purpose vehicle for the purpose of entering into bond subscription agreements with the defendants. The plaintiff was known as "Diamond Kendall Limited" up to its sale to Global Distressed Alpha Fund III Limited Partnership in or about July 2013 and its name was changed to CIFG Special Assets Capital I Ltd ("CIFG") on 13 August 2013. 3. The 1st defendant is a private limited company incorporated in Singapore. The 1st defendant owns a number of subsidiaries which are in the bus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Singapore Supreme Court
Quentin Loh J: 1. These registrar's appeals raise several issues on the arbitrability of intra-corporate disputes. First, whether minority oppression claims under s 216 of the Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) ("the CA") are arbitrable under Singapore law. Secondly, what principles, if any, should govern a stay application under s 6 of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) ("the IAA") where only part of the plaintiff's claim falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Thirdly, whether the Court can exercise its inherent powers of case management to stay proceedings when only some of the parties before it are parties to the arbitration agreement. The facts The parties 2. The plaintiff, Silica Investors Limited ("the Plaintiff'), is the registered shareholder of 3,750,000 shares (representing about 4.2% of all the shares) in the 8th defendant, Auzminerals Resource Group Limited ("AMRG"), a public company limited by shares and incorporated under the laws of ...
Tag this Judgment!