The Legal 500

10 COLLYER QUAY, #10-01 OCEAN FINANCIAL CENTRE, SINGAPORE 049315, SINGAPORE
Tel:
Work +65 6535 0733
Web:
www.drewnapier.com
Email:

Show all Press releases

Drew & Napier’s patents practice top tier in Singapore

February 2012

20 February 2012 - Drew & Napier LLC (“Drew”) is recognised once again by Managing Intellectual Property for its leading Intellectual Property (IP) practice. Drew ranked Tier One for both patents contentious and patents prosecution work in the annual Patent survey conducted by the noted IP publication.

The results were determined through interviews with clients and peers across more than 80 jurisdictions.

The Patents survey is part of a three-part series of surveys by Managing Intellectual Property.  The second and third parts of the survey cover trademark and copyright work and the results will be published in the March and April issues of the magazine. Drew’s trademark work has been consistently ranked top tier by the magazine for over a decade while its copyright work retained top spot for the past four years.  

Drew’s IP practice group is managed by directors Dedar Singh Gill and  Cecelia Girvin. 

For more information please contact:

Madhu Rai
Manager, Marketing & Communications
Tel: +65 6531 2482
Email: madhu.rai@drewnapier.com

Jason Tan
Senior Executive, Marketing & Communications (Corporate & Finance)
Tel: +65 6531 2425
Email: jason.tan@drewnapier.com 


About Drew & Napier LLC

Established in 1889, Drew & Napier LLC is one of Singapore's leading and largest law firms, with over 250 lawyers and fee-earners. Consistently rated top tier in dispute resolution over the years by international ranking organisations such as Asia Pacific Legal 500, Chambers Global, Practical Law Company, Best Lawyers and Asia Law, the firm has 7 Senior Counsel. The firm is headed by chief executive officer, Davinder Singh, Senior Counsel. Drew & Napier LLC is also rated top tier in Corporate Insolvency & Restructuring, Intellectual Property (Patents and Trademarks), Competition & Antitrust, Telecommunications, Media & Technology and Tax, with market leading practices in Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Finance, and Admiralty & Shipping. For more information, please visit www.drewnapier.com

Legal Developments by:
Drew & Napier LLC

  • Competition Appeal Board Dismisses Most Grounds of Appeal by Modelling Agencies

    On 10 April 2013, the Competition Appeal Board (CAB) dismissed all but two grounds of appeal by five modelling agencies that had been found by the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) to have engaged in price-fixing activities. CAB's decision resulted in a reduction in the total amount of financial penalties for the five modelling agencies.
    - Drew & Napier LLC

Legal Developments in Singapore

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Full Convergence with IFRS in 2018 for SGX-listed Companies

    The Singapore Accounting Standards Council ( ASC ) announced in late May 2014 that all Singapore-incorporated companies on the Singapore Exchange ( SGX ) must apply a new financial reporting framework identical to the International Financial Reporting Standards ( IFRS ) for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2018. This translates into a lead time of more than 3 years to embrace the new financial reporting framework.
  • Unlisted Indian Companies Given Green Light to Raise Funds Abroad

    Privately held Indian companies now have a two year window (which begun on 11 October 2013) to raise capital by directly listing on overseas markets without first listing in India. Despite the scheme being limited to International Organization of Securities Commission or Financial Action Task Force compliant jurisdictions, or those with which the Securities & Exchange Board of India ( SEBI ) has signed bilateral agreements, this marks a return to the Indian position in the 1990s and early 2000s. When the regulation changed in 2005, Indian companies had to satisfy the criteria of simultaneous or prior listing in India in order to undertake fund-raising abroad.
  • Are Damages for Loss of Profits from Termination of One Contract Recoverable in an Action for Breach

    Are damages for loss of profits from termination of ONE contract recoverable in an action for breach of A second INTER-RELATED contract?
  • All Aboard… Have Your Passports Ready II

    Our previous article in the November 2013 edition of the Chronicle introduced the genesis of the Asia Region Funds Passport project, being a framework to allow collective investment schemes ( CIS ) established and regulated in a passport member economy (the home economy ) to be offered to investors in other passport member economies (the host economy ) [1] . The working group members 2 have since released a consultation paper 3 setting out proposals relating to the application process and supervision / enforcement regime for the ARFP, as well as substantive criteria relating to the eligibility of passport funds, licensing of the passport fund operator, operation of the passport fund and investor interactions.
  • The Forthcoming LCIA Rules: A Snapshot of Current Trends in International Arbitration

    Introduction
  • Cross-Border Insolvencies – Building Blocks Towards Universalism

    The theory of universality in insolvency, along with globalisation, has gained much traction across many jurisdictions in recent years. Briefly, the universality theory proposes that an insolvency proceeding has worldwide effect over all the assets of the insolvent company, wherever they may be.
  • FAQs on the SGD-Denominated Corporate Bond Market

    We have compiled below a series of responses to questions which we frequently encounter in the course of advising our clients, and we hope that these will be useful for your planning purposes.  
  • Challenging Times: Arbitrator Bias and Investment Treaty Arbitration

    In the previous issue, we explored the English court's approach to challenges mounted by a party against an arbitrator's independence or impartiality under the UK's legislative framework for arbitration in the context of commercial arbitration. In this issue we will compare how similar challenges are resolved before arbitral tribunals in the context of investment treaty arbitration.
  • Red-Card – Penalty!

    Penalty clauses are unenforceable under both English and Singapore law. A distinction has traditionally been drawn between liquidated damages clauses and penalty clauses: while the former provides for a genuine, pre-determined compensation for a breach of contract and is upheld, the latter goes beyond compensation, seeks to deter parties from breaching a contract by penalizing that party and is unenforceable (see the seminal case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Limited v New Garage and Motor Company Limited [1]).
  • Halting Harassment

    Disgruntled employees and customers can sometimes wreak havoc in businesses.