The Legal 500

Rodyk & Davidson LLP

80 RAFFLES PLACE, #33-00 UOB PLAZA 1, SINGAPORE 048624, SINGAPORE
Tel:
Work +65 6225 2626
Fax:
Fax +65 6225 1838
Email:
Web:
www.rodyk.com
Singapore, Shanghai

The firm

Rodyk & Davidson LLP is a full-service leading Singapore law firm with offices in Singapore and Shanghai and an associate office in Jakarta. Rodyk represents a diverse clientele in a broad spectrum of industries and businesses, and maintains strong working relationships with key public sector agencies and leading organisations in the private sector. One of Singapore’s full-service firms, Rodyk enjoys the distinction of being the country’s oldest law practice and celebrated its 150th anniversary in 2011.

The firm’s team of more than 200 lawyers is grouped into five core practice groups: corporate, finance, intellectual property and technology, litigation and arbitration, and real estate. Specialist groups, including the firm’s China practice, competition law practice, India practice, Indonesia practice and maritime practice, draw expertise from across the firm to serve clients effectively.

Rodyk enjoys exclusive memberships in the World Law Group and the Pacific Rim Advisory Council, and offers its clients seamless and cost-effective services in 40 countries.

Areas of practice

Finance and corporate: Rodyk’s finance and corporate practice groups serve an extensive client base comprising banks and financial institutions, listed and non-listed corporations, government-linked companies, governmental bodies and high-net-worth individuals. The firm focuses on the following core areas: banking and finance, China, corporate and commercial, corporate finance, funds, venture capital and private equity, and projects.

Intellectual property and technology: the firm’s intellectual property and technology practice group is a dynamic practice, always keeping abreast of developments in a rapidly changing landscape. The firm advises on all aspects of intellectual property, including patents, trade marks, designs and copyright, and confidential information and trade secrets. Rodyk’s IP and technology practice group’s extensive international connections permit it to co-ordinate the global protection of its clients’ intellectual property rights.

Litigation and arbitration: the firm’s litigation and arbitration practice group advises clients on effective strategies for dispute resolution, whether by litigation, arbitration or alternative dispute resolution. The firm’s commercial litigation practice comprises practitioners who have acquired experience and detailed knowledge in diverse areas of business and commerce, enabling it to handle large and complex disputes that require specialist insight into the various market sectors.

Real estate: Rodyk’s real estate practice group’s clients include all the leaders in the real estate industry and banks active in this economic sector. The firm represents clients in a diverse range of property transactions, from large, high-value, complex, innovative transactions to acting for consumer banks in housing loans. The firm offers an effective one-stop service to its developer clients and institutional investors by frequently putting together a project team that combines the strength of the real estate practice groups with those of the lawyers in other practice groups.

LanguagesChinese
English
German
Japanese
Malay
Tamil

Other offices Shanghai

International groupings
Pacific Rim Advisory Council (PRAC)
World Law Group (WLG)

Number of lawyers 200+

Above material supplied by Rodyk & Davidson LLP.

Legal Developments in Singapore

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Timetable for Implementation of Amendments to the Companies Act

    This update relates to our series of legal updates issued over the 4th quarter of 2014 and earlier this year discussing the amendments to the Singapore Companies Act to be effected by the Companies (Amendment) Act 2014 (“Amendment Act ”). This update discusses the implementation timetable for the various amendments under the Amendment Act.
  • Impending Provisions in the Singapore Companies Act Relating to Duties of Chief Executive Officers

    This legal update highlights some of the key provisions of the Companies (Amendment) Act 2014 which relate to the role and duties of a Chief Executive Officer. These amendments were gazetted in late 2014, and whilst not yet in force, are widely expected to come into force in the second quarter of 2015.
  • RESOLVING INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES IN SINGAPORE – 101

    Singapore has been a trade bridge between the East and the West for close to 200 hundred years. It has one of the busiest ports and one of the best airports underlying its fantastic transportation links. For one of the most densely populated places on earth, the traffic flows smoothly, people get to places reliably on the metro network and there is a large number of taxis that gets you anywhere you need to be in about 10 minutes, or 20 if getting to or from the airport.
  • Competition Law Quarterly Update Q1/2015

    In this bumper issue, the Drew & Napier Competition & Regulatory Practice Group brings you the most notable events in the competition law world in the second half of 2014.
  • Corruption Updates – Lessons and Warnings from 2014

    2014 has been an active year for the prosecution of corruption cases.
  • Abolition of the Financial Assistance Prohibition for Private Companies

    The Companies (Amendment) Bill No. 25 of 2014 ( Amendment Bill ) was passed by the Singapore Parliament on 8 October 2014. The Amendment Bill introduces the largest overhaul of the Singapore Companies Act (Cap. 50) ( Companies Act ) since it was enacted in 1967.
  • Singapore International Commercial Court: a New Brand of Litigation?

    Singapore’s new International Commercial Court ( SICC ), which was launched at the beginning of the legal year, promises to offer a bold new method of resolving commercial disputes in South-East Asia and beyond. The establishment of the Court recognises that large, complex, commercial matters can be most effectively resolved by a bench of specialist judges according to bespoke procedures. This much is not new. Commercial courts have grown up around the world to meet the need for businesses to resolve disputes fairly and efficiently. This need has intensified as trade and commerce has grown increasingly international and parties have found themselves litigating in different quarters of the world. The launch of the SICC can be seen in that context as a response to the need for a dedicated commercial litigation forum in the region. But the ambitions for SICC are arguably higher than that. Informed by the current landscape for resolving commercial disputes, the Court ventures into unchartered waters in at least two respects. First, it offers parties a flexibility in procedure that is influenced by practices seen in international arbitration. Secondly, and arguably more importantly, the Court may cause the development of a jurisprudence that consolidates and harmonises the region’s commercial laws: a lex mercatoria for Asia.
  • Who Bears the Burden of an Intermediary’s Corruption?

    The criminal sanctions for bribery and corruption are well known. So too is the fact that a principal may be liable for the payment of a bribe by one of its agents. What then happens when the bribe is paid by an intermediary who may have been acting for both parties? Further, what are the civil consequences of an intermediary’s bribe to close a deal?
  • Boosting Market Participation Among Retail Investors: Reduction of Board Lot Size

    The Singapore Exchange Limited ( SGX ) will reduce the standard board lot size of securities listed on SGX from 1,000 units currently to 100 units from 19 January 2015.
  • Squabbling Ex-spouses Make Good Corporate Law (Again)

    A trend is emerging that business lawyers need to read family law reports to discern new legal principles [1] . This is perhaps not surprising as wealthy individuals hold their personal wealth through corporate entities. In Singapore, such a scenario gave rise to the need for the High Court to consider whether the shareholders of a company may resolve to manage the company when the directors are unable to act. In a learned and closely reasoned judgment, giving full weight to the variance under