Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee (trading as Phil Real Estate & Building Services)
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judgment Date | 26 April 1995 |
| Date | 26 April 1995 |
| Docket Number | Civil Appeal No 128 of 1994 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Singapore) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
8 cases
-
Gay Choon Ing v Loh Sze Ti Terence Peter
...Sibotre [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep 293 (refd) Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee [1994] 2 SLR (R) 910; [1994] 3 SLR 224 (refd) Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee [1995] 1 SLR (R) 886; [1995] 2 SLR 466 (refd) Sneath v Valley Gold, Limited [1893] 1 Ch 477 (refd) SSAB Oxelosund AB v Xendral Trading Pte Ltd [1991] 2 SLR (R)......
-
Rainforest Trading Ltd v State Bank of India Singapore
...Thomas (1842) 3 QB 234; 114 ER 496 (refd) Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee [1994] 2 SLR (R) 910; [1994] 3 SLR 224 (refd) Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee [1995] 1 SLR (R) 886; [1995] 2 SLR 466 (refd) South East Asia Insurance Bhd v Nasir Ibrahim [1992] 2 MLJ 355 (refd) Susilawati v American Express Bank Ltd [2......
-
Rainforest Trading Ltd and another v State Bank of India Singapore
...& Building Services) [1994] 2 SLR(R) 910 (“Sim Tony HC”) and Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee (trading as Phil Real Estate & Building Services) [1995] 1 SLR(R) 886 (“Sim Tony CA”). In so far as the second point was concerned, the Respondent submitted that it was clear law that a deposit of share cert......
-
Ma Hongjin v SCP Holdings Pte Ltd and another
...past consideration rule does not simply look at chronology: Sim Tony v Lim Ah Ghee (trading as Phil Real Estate & Building Services) [1995] 1 SLR(R) 886 at [16]. Rather, what is crucial is the nexus between the act said to be consideration and the promise. Specifically, the later act must b......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
CONTRACTUAL ILLEGALITY AND CONFLICT OF LAWS
...rule 8 is … displaced when all the necessary facts are placed before the court.” The High Court decision was affirmed on appeal, see [1995] 2 S.L.R. 466. 5 See also Edler v. Auerbach[1950] 1 K.B. 359. 6 [1892] 2 Q.B. 724. 7 Ibid., at 728. See also Theresa Chong v. Kin Khoon & Co. [1976] 2 M......