High Court may impose timeframe on an order requiring a defendant to perform an act
16 Aug 2019
In Viking Engineering Pte Ltd v Feen, Bjornar and others  SGHC 158, the Singapore High Court clarified that Order 45 Rule 6 of the Rules of Court can be utilised to set a timeframe for payment where the circumstances warrant the exercise of such discretion. In particular, the court is likely to exercise its discretion to impose such a deadline for payment where evidence is tendered demonstrating some form of contumelious conduct.
Please click here to read the update.