Header image

Stephenson Harwood wins appeal in Singapore's High Court

争议解决 | 24/09/2024

Law firm Stephenson Harwood LLP recently secured a victory in the Appellate Division of the Singapore High Court, obtaining a favourable ruling for the firm's client, Hanjin Shipbuilding and Construction ('HJSC').

The appeal, filed by Seatrium New Energy Ltd (formerly known as Keppel FELS Ltd) was unanimously dismissed by the three-judge bench.

In dismissing Seatrium's appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed HJSC's interpretation of the letter agreement entered into between parties as part of the delivery of a number of pontoons by HJSC to Seatrium (the 'Letter Agreement'). HJSC's interpretation of the Letter Agreement was that HJSC would be released from all liability to Seatrium under the contract between the parties, save for HJSC's warranty obligations in respect of the works it had carried out, which the Appellate Division took the view accorded with commercial sense.  

Seatrium argued that HJSC owed Seatrium a separate duty of care in tort which was co-terminous with HJSC's contractual obligations under the contract between HJSC and Seatrium, and that HJSC's liability in tort was not excluded by the Letter Agreement. However, the Appellate Division agreed with HJSC's position that (a) as any such duty of care in tort was co-terminous with HJSC's contractual obligations, and (b) parties' intention under the Letter Agreement was for HJSC to be released from all liability save for its warranty obligations, any duty of care in tort owed by HJSC would also be released pursuant to the Letter Agreement.

On the point of HJSC's warranty obligations, Seatrium sought to argue, on appeal, that HJSC remained liable under its warranty obligations as there was no express notice requirement in the warranty clause, and that the defects complained of by Seatrium were latent defects which existed during the warranty period. The Appellate Division held that HJSC's warranty obligations only covered defects which manifest or are discovered during the warranty period.

Partner Michael Kim in Seoul and Virtus Law partner Daryll Ng in Singapore led the team on this matter, and were supported by Virtus Law partner Kaili Ang and associate Shannon Yeo, and Seoul-based associate Glynnis Lee and legal researcher Monica Park. Further support on the case was provided by senior counsel Kenneth Tan.

分享文章

相关领域

关于作者

相关文章

Adobestock 65325050
Dispute Resolution

Going Concerns- February 2026

了解更多
Adobestock 173257706
Commercial Litigation

Vexatious or oppressive? Testing sanctions risk as a factor for an anti-suit injunction

了解更多
Adobestock 1588113638
Group Actions

The Supreme Court reinstates the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision on opt-out collective proceedings in Evans v Barclays Bank Plc

了解更多
Adobestock 266218958
Dispute Resolution

Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal affirms the right of silence

了解更多
Adobestock 74292039
Commercial Litigation

Motorola v Hytera: Court of Appeal rules on the enforcement of foreign judgments

了解更多
Adobestock 221718648
Dispute Resolution

Workplace safety and health - it starts from the top

了解更多
Adobestock 65325050
Regulatory & Investigations

Market abuse in focus - The Gerrity case and recent trends

了解更多
Adobestock 582823897
Dispute Resolution

Virtus Law successfully assisted Oldendorff in court of appeal case on conversion

了解更多