Remedying the uncertainty surrounding penalties and liquidated damages: Denka Advantech Pte Ltd v Seraya Energy Pte Ltd [2021] 1 SLR 631
In Singapore, the authority for penalty clauses had always been the seminal case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited v New Garage and Motor Company, Limited (“Dunlop”).
محفوظ في:
المؤلفون الرئيسيون: | TAN, Qing Zhe, LEE, Rui Xin |
---|---|
التنسيق: | text |
اللغة: | English |
منشور في: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2022
|
الموضوعات: | |
الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sljlexicon/12 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sljlexicon/article/1013/viewcontent/remedying.pdf |
الوسوم: |
إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
|
مواد مشابهة
-
Case commentary on Giant Light Metal Technology (Kunshan) Co Ltd v Aksa Far East Pte Ltd [2014] 2 SLR 545
بواسطة: CHONG, Adeline
منشور في: (2020) -
Taming reflective loss – Miao Weiguo v Tendcare Medical Group Holdings Pte Ltd [2022] 1 SLR 884
بواسطة: LEE, Pey Woan
منشور في: (2023) -
What cases are to be heard by the Appellate Division and why: Noor Azlin bte Abdul Rahman and another v Changi General Hospital Pte Ltd [2021] 2 SLR 440
بواسطة: NAI, Grace Jin Yi
منشور في: (2023) -
Premature service of payment claims under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act: Audi Construction Pte Ltd v Kian Hiap Construction Pte Ltd
بواسطة: ONG, Benjamin Joshua
منشور في: (2018) -
Defining an Interlocutory Application: OpenNet Pte Ltd v IDA [2013] SGCA 24
بواسطة: CHUA, Eunice
منشور في: (2013)