{"id":143430,"date":"2026-07-10T10:54:28","date_gmt":"2026-07-10T10:54:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=legal-landscapes&p=143430"},"modified":"2026-07-10T11:06:21","modified_gmt":"2026-07-10T11:06:21","slug":"singapore-litigation","status":"publish","type":"legal-landscapes","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/legal-landscapes\/singapore-litigation\/","title":{"rendered":"Singapore- Litigation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Topic 1:\u00a0 <\/strong>What is the current legal landscape for Litigation in Singapore?<\/strong><\/h4>\n

This year marks two hundred years since the foundation of Singapore\u2019s legal and judicial system. This milestone brings renewed focus to the foundations for Singapore\u2019s ascendance as a leading global legal hub. The jurisprudence of the Singapore Courts continues to be highly supportive of commercial certainty. Case law from the past 12 months reflects the Judiciary’s emphasis on upholding commercial expectations across a breadth of cases.<\/p>\n

On the international front, the Singapore International Commercial Court (\u201cSICC\u2019<\/strong>) rejected the Russian Federation\u2019s attempt to resist the enforcement of three arbitral awards in favour of former shareholders of the Yukos Oil Company (Hulley Enterprises Ltd and others v The Russian Federation <\/em>[2025] SGHC(I) 19). The Russian Federation\u2019s application had been premised on state immunity from the jurisdiction of the Singapore Courts. In precluding a challenge on this ground, the SICC applied the doctrine of transnational issue estoppel and alluded to international comity and the public policy in favour of finality of litigation.<\/p>\n

On the domestic end of the spectrum, a dispute between the shareholders of a prominent business operating \u2018economy rice\u2019 stalls came before the Court of Appeal (Kok Kuan Hwa v Yap Wing Sang and another appeal <\/em>[2025] SGHC(A) 16). The dispute centred on whether the shareholders had an agreement on their respective interests in various companies which were not mirrored in their registered shareholdings. In overturning the decision at first instance, the Court of Appeal held that subsequent conduct was relevant to the issue of contract formation and also took into account the commercial plausibility of the pleaded contracts.<\/p>\n

In line with such jurisprudence, Singapore\u2019s legal system continues to offer robust support for the litigation needs of businesses while maintaining broader access to justice. The SICC is the centrepiece of Singapore’s efforts to offer a world-class forum for the litigation of cross-border commercial disputes. Established in 2015, the SICC\u2019s case load has grown significantly and the number of cases commenced directly in the SICC now outnumber those transferred from the Singapore High Court.<\/p>\n

Looking ahead, reforms are being rolled out to make the enforcement of Court orders more effective and efficient. It has been announced that a bill will be tabled in Parliament to enhance the Court\u2019s powers following judgment, introduce new enforcement modes and create a new class of Civil Judgment Enforcement Officers. These anticipated measures will bring welcome improvements to the civil enforcement process.<\/p>\n

Topic 2:\u00a0 What three essential pieces of advice would you give to clients involved in Litigation matters?<\/strong><\/h4>\n

I. Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

The following three pieces of advice are essential for clients involved in civil or commercial disputes, who are contemplating litigation.<\/p>\n

II. Defining the Desired Objectives<\/strong><\/p>\n

Before embarking on any dispute resolution process, clients must be familiar with their objectives and should first identify their desired outcomes and what they might consider a successful resolution. For corporate clients, this may involve the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and an alignment of their objectives.<\/p>\n

Having clearly defined objectives from the outset enables the client to instruct their lawyers accordingly, and to obtain advice on what the most appropriate course of action would be, including whether litigation is even necessary at all. In some instances, the desired outcomes may not be available at law, or cannot be guaranteed without further due diligence or information. For example, whether a claimant will be successful in obtaining damages or recovering a debt, requires an assessment of the respondent\u2019s ability to pay and\/or knowledge of the respondent\u2019s assets.<\/p>\n

Clients should always keep their ultimate objectives firmly in mind in order not to be left disappointed with the outcome of their litigation matters.<\/p>\n

III. Understanding the Investment Required<\/strong><\/p>\n

Beyond legal fees, litigation demands significant time, attention and commitment from the clients at every stage. Clients must be prepared to meet these demands to support an effective litigation strategy.<\/p>\n

Depending on the complexity of the dispute, litigation matters may take months or even years to conclude. Interlocutory applications and procedural developments may also prolong proceedings. Being involved in long-drawn litigation may place significant stress and encroach on clients\u2019 personal lives.<\/p>\n

Further, litigation is an active, evidence-driven process. Success depends not only on legal strategy but also on the strength and availability of evidence. Further, compliance with formal court deadlines and rules is crucial. While lawyers provide legal expertise and strategic guidance, successful litigation is rarely achieved without meaningful client involvement as clients are the primary source of the relevant information necessary to substantiate a robust case.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, clients should ensure that they are able to commit the time and resources necessary to provide support on litigation matters. This may involve addressing queries from their lawyers, investigating the facts underlying their case, and gathering extensive documents. For businesses, this may also entail allocating management time and internal resources away from day-to-day operations.<\/p>\n

Litigation therefore requires planning and a clear-eyed appreciation of the commitment involved. Clients should be ready to allocate sufficient resources to support the pursuit of their desired outcome.<\/p>\n

IV. Assessing the Merits of the Case<\/strong><\/p>\n

Finally, clients should always seek professional legal advice on the merits of any contemplated claim or defence before committing to litigation.<\/p>\n

The ultimate question is whether the case is likely to withstand scrutiny before the courts and achieve the client\u2019s intended objectives. In this regard, lawyers are best placed to provide a preliminary but critical assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a case, identify potential legal and evidential challenges, and advise on the risks and estimated costs involved. While no advice can guarantee a particular outcome, obtaining an early assessment serves as an important reality check, illuminating both the limitations of a case and the practical constraints of the litigation process.<\/p>\n

More importantly, this will enable clients to weigh the merits of their case against the likely resources required to pursue it, and to properly decide what course of action to take in relation to a civil or commercial dispute.<\/p>\n

Topic 3: What are the greatest threats and opportunities in Litigation law in the next 12 months?<\/h4>\n

We expect trade tensions, market volatility, and geopolitical uncertainty to coalesce into an acute stress test for litigation practitioners. There will be a pressing need to find practical and cost-efficient solutions for clients who face contractual disruption and cross-border disputes but have less appetite for prolonged litigation. The flip side is a real opportunity. Singapore’s reputation for neutrality and institutional quality could become a more compelling proposition than ever. The launch of the Bahrain International Commercial Court in November 2025 \u2014 under a bilateral judicial collaboration framework that allows BICC appeals to be heard by a specially constituted International Committee of the SICC \u2014 illustrates how Singapore\u2019s legal system can play a stabilising role in the resolution of international disputes.<\/p>\n

We also expect the affordability of quality legal representation to come under greater strain along with rising inflation and economic stratification. This can present real challenges to individuals and small businesses. In recognition of this, the Singapore Government has increased the per capita household income ceiling for civil legal aid. In the same vein, practitioners will need to relook pricing and staffing strategies in order to cater to the needs of a wider range of income groups.<\/p>\n

Finally, AI is already reshaping how lawyers work, and the pace of change will only accelerate. Firms that fail to adopt it risk being outcompeted on cost and efficiency and those that adopt it carelessly risk serious professional harm. Singapore\u2019s Courts and the Ministry of Law have both issued guidance placing the onus squarely on lawyers to ensure the any information submitted to the Court is independently verified, accurate, true and appropriate. At the same time, the harnessing of this technology represents a significant opportunity to elevate the quality of our work and our strategic value to clients.<\/p>\n

Topic 4: How do you ensure high client satisfaction levels are maintained by your practice?<\/h4>\n

1. Our practice maintains high levels of client satisfaction levels by adopting a client-oriented approach from the outset of every case. We rigorously assess the merits of our client\u2019s case, ensuring they receive clear advice on the risks, timelines and expected costs of their case.<\/p>\n

2. We recognise the time-sensitive nature of contentious matters and endeavour to provide timely advice that furthers our client\u2019s interests. Our practice is committed to consistent communication, ensuring clients are constantly apprised of developments throughout the course of their case. When clients approach us with complex problems, we seek to identify the key issues and develop practical strategies that align with our clients\u2019 commercial considerations.<\/p>\n

3. We value the trust that clients repose in us and recognise the responsibility that comes with every engagement. Clients involved in disputes may face understandable pressures and uncertainty. We seek to ease that burden by walking our clients through every step of the dispute to achieve an outcome that is most favourable to our clients.<\/p>\n

4. Part of this approach also involves identifying alternative dispute resolution (\u201cADR\u201d) mechanisms such as mediation where it is best suited to our client\u2019s needs. For instance, concerns over unwanted publicity during a public trial weigh in favour of ADR which provides a confidential mode of dispute resolution. By recommending ADR where appropriate, our practice can provide more efficient and cost-effective solutions that prioritise our client\u2019s interests.<\/p>\n

5. Finally, our practice\u2019s ability to leverage on artificial intelligence (\u201cAI\u201d) has also enhanced the quality and timeliness of the legal services we deliver to our clients. AI has allowed us to streamline labour-intensive processes and routine tasks. This allows our lawyers to focus on high value advice and strategic planning where human judgment remains essential. Crucially, our embrace of AI remains firmly anchored in a culture of responsibility where clients can be confident that their data is handled with integrity and subject to rigorous professional judgment.<\/p>\n

Topic 5: What technological advancements are reshaping Litigation law and how can clients benefit from them?<\/h4>\n

1. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the single most significant driver of change in litigation practice in Singapore, reshaping how disputes are prepared, costed and presented. Recent regulatory guidance makes clear that while AI can enhance efficiency, responsibility for outputs remains firmly with counsel.<\/p>\n

2. On 6 March 2026, the Ministry of Law launched its Guide for Using Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Legal Sector. The guide identifies three governing principles, professional ethics, confidentiality and transparency, and makes clear that, while encouraging AI\u2019s practical uses, lawyers retain ultimate responsibility for every work product.<\/p>\n

3. AI can benefit clients and their lawyers through being a more cost-effective tool to assist with a client\u2019s case. In particular, if the litigation is document heavy, AI can be used to speed up the analysis of large amounts of documents which would otherwise be done in multiples of billable hours.<\/p>\n

4. Market understanding is converging on the need for controlled, supervised deployment of AI.<\/p>\n

5. A key risk is hallucination. AI can produce answers that sound confident but are fake. Singapore courts have already highlighted this danger. In one 2025 case, a litigant-in-person cited 14 fictitious cases after relying on ChatGPT without verification. In at least two other matters, the court ordered lawyers personally to pay costs after non-existent cases generated by AI were cited in submissions.<\/p>\n

6. Key risks also arise in respect of data permissions, legal privilege and confidentiality. Clients should understand the terms on which their data is stored and processed by third parties who provide AI tools. This can already be seen in judgments from the United Kingdom and the United States, where legal privilege was waived because legal advice was input into certain AI tools. There is also a risk that clients may breach contractual obligations of confidentiality if information or documents are disclosed to a third-party.<\/p>\n

7. At Drew & Napier, AI deployment is embedded within a controlled framework, including pre-approved tools, data governance safeguards, and client-directed consent parameters. We currently utilise Microsoft 365 Copilot and Harvey to enhance efficiency while maintaining strict oversight of confidentiality, privilege and output verification.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","class_list":["post-143430","legal-landscapes","type-legal-landscapes","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/legal-landscapes\/143430","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/legal-landscapes"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/legal-landscapes"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143430"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}