Re Gyles QC
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Court | High Court (Singapore) |
| Judgment Date | 15 April 1996 |
| Docket Number | Originating Motion No 11 of 1996 |
| Date | 15 April 1996 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
6 cases
-
Re Platts-Mills Mark Fortescue QC
...[2001] 2 SLR 276 (folld) Genelabs Diagnostics Pte Ltd v Institut Pasteur [2000] 3 SLR (R) 530; [2001] 1 SLR 121 (refd) Gyles QC, Re [1996] 1 SLR (R) 871; [1996] 2 SLR 695 (folld) Howe Martin Russell Thomas QC, Re [2001] 2 SLR (R) 743; [2001] 3 SLR 575 (folld) Kirin-Amgen Inc v Hoechst Mario......
-
Godfrey Gerald QC v UBS AG and Others
...2 SLR 782 at p 786), there would be little justification in admitting a QC if local counsel are ready and able to act (Re Gyles QC [1996] 2 SLR 695 at 700). While it appeared that Mr Goh had approached three other SCs (Mr Kenneth Tan SC, Mr Michael Khoo SC and Mr Alvin Yeo SC) unsuccessfull......
-
Re Joseph David QC
...Re [2001] 1 SLR (R) 433; [2001] 2 SLR 276 (refd) Godfrey Gerald QC v UBS AG [2003] 2 SLR (R) 306; [2003] 2 SLR 306 (refd) Gyles QC, Re [1996] 1 SLR (R) 871; [1996] 2 SLR 695 (refd) Insigma Technology Co Ltd v Alstom Technology Ltd [ 2009] 1 SLR (R) 23; [2009] 1 SLR 23 (refd) Insigma Technol......
-
Re Joseph David QC
...area of international arbitration law and practice would allow him to illuminate “the true shades of the law and fact” (Re Gyles QC [1996] 1 SLR(R) 871 at [5]). Pertinently, neither the Attorney-General (representing the Public Interest) nor the Law Society (representing the interests of th......
Get Started for Free
