Breach of Agreement Versus Vexatious, Oppressive and Unconscionable Conduct: Clarifying their Relationship in the Law of Anti-Suit Injunctions
Cases warranting the grant of an anti-suit injunction can be divided into three main categories: breach of agreement, vexatious, oppressive, or unconscionable conduct, and abuse of process. A series of Singapore cases have demonstrated that the boundaries between the first two categories are ambiguo...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/1763 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/3715/viewcontent/9229593.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Cases warranting the grant of an anti-suit injunction can be divided into three main categories: breach of agreement, vexatious, oppressive, or unconscionable conduct, and abuse of process. A series of Singapore cases have demonstrated that the boundaries between the first two categories are ambiguous in Singapore law. This ambiguity reflects a lack of clarity about the principles underlying anti-suit injunctions and creates uncertainty as to the applicable analysis for each category. This article argues that the two categories should be distinct in kind, with both categories remaining part of the court’s equitable jurisdiction. Such an approach will provide a good foundation in principle for the applicable rules of law and provide a principled foundation for the “strong reasons” standard. |
|---|