Singapore

A century ago, Lord Hewart emphatically stated in R v Sussex Justices ex parte McCarty [1924] KB 256 that “ … it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should n...

Introduction Two years on from the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, Singapore’s economic outlook is looking much brighter than it was before.

Yuen Law is pleased to announce that P.Padman has joined the firm as a Consultant, bringing with him over three decades of experience in general and commercial litigation. Padman, previously a consultant at TKQP, brings a wealth of expertise in disputes matters, including shareholder disputes, property litigation, medical malpractice, and contractual issues, amongst others. “We are delighted to welcome Padman to the Yuen Law family,” said Amos Cai, Head of Disputes Resolution at Yuen Law. “Padman’s exceptional skill set and experience in handling complex litigation and arbitration matters will be an invaluable asset to our clients and team. Yuen Law’s Managing Director Samuel Yuen added, “It is essential that our clients receive not just sound legal advice but also tailored solutions that align with their wider business objectives. There is increasing demand in Southeast Asia for technically sound and experienced Legal Practitioners who can engage in robust dispute and complex arbitration and Padman is a perfect fit for our growing practice. His addition significantly strengthens our ability to support more clients in these areas of practice.” Padman is a highly respected figure in international commercial arbitration, regularly acting as counsel in high-profile disputes under institutions such as the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), and UNCITRAL. He has substantial experience in court enforcement of arbitral awards and providing strategic counsel to corporations on employment law, contractual obligations, and statutory duties. Padman frequently represents the Law Society of Singapore in High Court cases. He also serves on the Law Society’s Inquiry Panel, where he reviews and investigates complaints of professional misconduct against lawyers. Notably, Padman represented the Law Society in the case Lee Wei Ling and another v. Law Society of Singapore [2021] SGHC 87, which involved disciplinary complaints against Ms. Kwa Kim Li, the lawyer who drafted the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s wills. Padman is also an instructor in the Practice Trainee Advocacy Programme and sits on the Singapore Medical Council Complaints Committee. Padman’s addition to the team further strengthens Yuen Law’s ability to deliver exceptional litigation and arbitration services to clients. Learn more about P. Padman and his practice. About Yuen Law Founded in 2012 by Managing Director Samuel Yuen, Yuen Law is a leading full-service law firm based in Singapore, recognized for its client-centric approach and commercial acumen. The firm is known for delivering innovative and practical legal solutions across key sectors, including mergers and acquisitions, fintech and financial regulatory matters, dispute resolution, and private wealth and family law. Yuen Law is committed to assisting clients in navigating complex legal challenges both locally and internationally. Leveraging Singapore’s strategic position as the gateway to Southeast Asia, the firm provides tailored support to businesses and Individuals seeking to establish or expand operations in the region.

In WXW v WXX [2025] SGHC(A) 2, the Appellate Division of the High Court clarified that whether a marriage is classified as single-income or dual-income in nature is dependent on the roles undertaken and discharged by the spouses during the marriage. This classification is significant as it determines the applicable approach for the division of matrimonial assets pursuant to s 112 of the Women’s Charter. Director Hoon Shu Mei discusses this decision. Please click here to read the update.  

In DEM v DEL [2025] SGCA 1, the Court of Appeal considered among other things whether a non-participating party to an arbitration can challenge the award on grounds that the arbitrator failed to consider a point which was not put in issue.The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and held that although the arbitrator did not consider the issue, the appellant was not entitled to rely on this ground to challenge the award because he chose not to participate in the arbitration. Director Terence Tan discusses this decision in this update. You may read the update here.  

We highlight key aspects of the Protection from Scams Bill, such as the basis and impact of restriction orders issued by specified police officers, and the potential risks for banks. Read more here.