• Profile
• Experience
• Accolades
• Resources
• Seminars
• Appointments

Acted on behalf of Japan Airlines International Co Ltd and American Airlines Inc (the "Joint Applicants") in their Notification Application for Decision to the CCS under s.44 of the Competition Act (Cap. 50B) with respect to their Joint Business Agreement and Alliance Agreement (the "Agreements"). These Agreements were cleared by CCS on 7 April 2011. The CCS' clearance decision allows the Joint Applicants, as members of the oneworld alliance, to implement the Agreements in relation to Singapore, boosting their level of cooperation on the operation of transpacific routes between Singapore and United States via Japan. The Agreements enable the two carriers to work together to optimise and expand their product offerings and quality of service to air passengers, providing enhanced and more effective competition against other global airline alliances. After nearly four months of deliberations and intense scrutiny of submissions and arguments submitted on behalf of the Joint Applicants, the CCS issued their official clearance of the Agreements on 7 April 2011, concluding that the Agreements result in net economic benefits to competition in Singapore and are thus excluded from the s.34 prohibition of the Competition Act.

Acting in an SIAC arbitration in a substantial contractual dispute relating to sale of submarine fibre optic cables between Singapore and Jakarta.

Acted as Singapore counsel to AIG, advising it on Singapore regulatory and competition issues relating to the proposed sale of its Asian life insurance arm to Britain's Prudential for S$50 billion. Previously advised AIG on regulatory issues relating to its exit from the Federal Reserve funding.

Acted in a case where the High court struck out the multiplier applied by a party in the computation of its claim for damages for breach of warranty in a case where the underlying agreement had  no express contractual provision for the use of such a multiplier in computing damages. Reported at [2008] SGHC 131.

Acted for FedExpress Services (M) Sdn Bhd in a claim brought against them by Smart Modular Technologies Sdn Bhd. Smart's shipment of semi-conductor chips through FedEx was hijacked and one of the issues in the case was whether the exclusion clause, which, inter alia, provided that FedEx would not be liable for events beyond its control, in the contract of carriage was applicable. The High Court found in FedEx's favour and the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision. Reported at [2006] 2 SLR 797 and subsequent Court of Appeal decision reported at [2007] 1 SLR 411.