新加坡法律饼干店
#01-LAW
est. 2023 · baked daily, no holidays
FRESH BATCH · 06:02 SGT
SELF SERVICE · 自助服务
30 cookies that day

baked fresh
that morning

Singapore's daily legal output, reduced to the signals worth biting into.

★ THE DAILY BAKE ★

DATETHU 25 JUN 2026
OVEN OPENED06:02 SGT

○ NEWS15
⬡ JUDGMENTS15
▲ PINEAPPLE TARTS4
FRESH23
COOLING RACK3

BUSIEST OVENREAL PROPERTY LAW ×6
NEW INGREDIENT"FATHER"

thank you — come again tomorrow

FRESHLY LOGGED

straight from the oven, tray by tray

DISPLAY CASE · SCROLL →
Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 formulates transaction-based test for consideration under claw-back provisions s 73B CLPA and s 438 IRDA Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Restructuring Law · JUDICIARY PINEAPPLE TART · ACT ON
Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 allows claw-back appeal for referral fees, holding percentage-based investor introduction fees constitute adequate consideration Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Restructuring Law · JUDICIARY PINEAPPLE TART · ACT ON
Singapore may reform insurance law to align with UK's proportionate remedies for non-disclosure. Insurance Law · SLW PINEAPPLE TART · ACT ON
MAS introduces revised licensing exemption framework for Single Family Offices Securities and Financial Instruments Law · SLW PINEAPPLE TART · ACT ON
District Court in [2026] SGDC 202 holds that strata management corporation not liable for breach of statutory duty where subsidiary proprietor failed to comply with mandatory Building Manual requirements for fitting out approvals. Real Property Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
District Court in [2026] SGDC 202 finds subsidiary proprietor liable for breach of by-laws and damage to unit after commencing unauthorised renovation works without permit. Personal Injury and Tort Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Magistrate's Court holds in [2026] SGMC 79 that res ipsa loquitur may apply even where claimant advances a positive theory of causation. Negligence and Malpractice Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Magistrate's Court holds in [2026] SGMC 79 that static friction alone is insufficient to satisfy standard of care for securing heavy panels in public areas. Negligence and Malpractice Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Magistrate's Court holds in [2026] SGMC 79 that cycling on pedestrian pathways and absence of helmet do not constitute contributory negligence. Negligence and Malpractice Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 holds that 'profit' in employment contracts means actual profit, defeating contractual basis for commissions in Ponzi scheme Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Restructuring Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 holds reinvested commissions constitute conveyance of property and diminish insolvent estate under s 73B CLPA Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Restructuring Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 affirms high threshold for appellate intervention with discretion to decline claw-back under insolvency provisions Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Restructuring Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
High Court holds in [2026] SGHC 135 that the 2% Proxy Rule under the Building (Strata Management) Act 2004 applies only to proxies, not to representatives appointed by letters of authorisation Real Property Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH
High Court clarifies in [2026] SGHC 135 that purposive interpretation under section 9A of the Interpretation Act 1965 cannot override unambiguous statutory text Real Property Law · JUDICIARY $0.60 · FRESH

The chips on each cookie are its FOLIO concepts — more chips, more doctrine. Pineapple tarts are reserved for the signals you act on. 3 more bakes are on the cooling rack below.

Today's Specials

the pineapple tarts — they change what you do on Monday
01⬡ JUDGMENT

Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 formulates transaction-based test for consideration under claw-back provisions s 73B CLPA and s 438 IRDA

The court clarified that consideration under s 73B of the CLPA and s 438 of the IRDA must be assessed contextually within the parameters of the impugned transaction itself, and must have been within the parties' contemplation at the time of the transaction. Unbargained-for benefits subsequently conferred are irrelevant, and contemporaneity is required. This reformulates how practitioners must analyse adequacy of consideration in claw-back claims.

Why it mattersPractitioners defending claw-back claims must now focus narrowly on what was bargained for at the time of the transaction, not post-hoc justifications or collateral benefits.

JUDICIARY READ JUDGMENT ↗
02⬡ JUDGMENT

Court of Appeal in [2026] SGCA 28 allows claw-back appeal for referral fees, holding percentage-based investor introduction fees constitute adequate consideration

The court allowed Mr Koh's appeal regarding Pre-April 2020 Referral Fees of $49,582.70, holding that these fees—contractually based on amounts invested (0.8%-2.75%) rather than actual profits—were supported by adequate consideration. The court rejected that subsequent diversion to a Ponzi scheme could retrospectively render inadequate what was adequate at the time of transaction, distinguishing these from profit-linked commissions.

Why it mattersThis creates a meaningful distinction for practitioners between profit-linked and transaction-linked referral fees in claw-back defences, and confirms that subsequent illegality does not retrospectively vitiate consideration.

JUDICIARY READ JUDGMENT ↗
03○ NEWS

Singapore may reform insurance law to align with UK's proportionate remedies for non-disclosure.

Current Singapore law allows insurers to avoid policies ab initio for material non-disclosure, whereas the UK Insurance Act 2015 provides proportionate remedies. A Law Reform Committee subcommittee has proposed shifting toward the UK model, including varied remedies based on whether non-disclosure was deliberate or negligent.

Why it mattersLawyers should monitor potential legislative changes that would replace the current draconian remedy of avoidance with a more nuanced, proportionate framework.

04○ NEWS

MAS introduces revised licensing exemption framework for Single Family Offices

Effective 15 June 2026, qualifying Single Family Offices (SFOs) can benefit from an automatic class exemption from licensing under the Securities and Futures Act 2001. The framework is structure-agnostic, allowing SFOs held via trusts, foundations, or corporations to qualify provided they meet specific conditions and notify MAS.

Why it mattersLawyers must ensure their SFO clients meet the new qualifying criteria and adhere to the notification and annual reporting obligations to maintain their exempt status.