Credit Suisse AG, Singapore Branch (Petitioner) applied to appoint Joint Provisional Liquidators (JPLs) to monitor the implementation of an insolvent restructuring by the board of Up Energy Development Group Limited. The Company opposed the application, arguing that the majority of unsecured creditors supported restructuring without JPLs. The Court had to determine whether independent oversight was necessary.

Wounding with intent possession of a bladed weapon identification based on witnesses

The Official Receiver and Provisional Liquidator applied for court directions regarding the first Meeting of Creditors specifically the validity of resolutions passed including the appointment of a single creditor Wilmington Trust as a Committee of Inspection

Melvern Williams a naturalised British Overseas Territories Citizen from Jamaica was wrongly terminated from his employment due to the Department of Immigration's instruction that he was working without a work permit

Defendants booked a room police found drugs and paraphernalia during a raid charged with possession and intent to supply cocaine and diamorphine

Dispute over enforcement of maintenance arrears beyond 12 months

Accused convicted of sexual exploitation and incest against two sisters

Legislation banning same-sex marriage for a religious purpose breach of freedom of conscience and discrimination due to creed Domestic Partnership Act 2018 voids same-sex marriage despite Human Rights Act 1981 marriage defined as male and female rights of individuals and religious ministers affected DPA challenged for depriving right to same-sex marriage laws passed for religious purposes deemed unconstitutional

Parris charged with theft and possession of a bladed article pleads guilty sentenced to 3 years imprisonment suspended for 2 years

Company sought court's permission for a creditors' meeting for a scheme of arrangement concerning its reinsurance business excluding a specific ART transaction. Company was solvent intending either a solvent liquidation or new business post-scheme

The Applicant a medical practitioner was arrested on May 19 2016 under section 23(6) of PACE and his home was searched without a warrant under section 18 of PACE. The controversy centered on the legality of the arrest and search particularly whether it was necessary to consider alternatives to arrest when preconditions for a lawful arrest were met. The case highlighted the need for careful consideration of the discretion to arrest especially in the context of less intrusive means of achieving investigation objectives. The Applicant had not been formally questioned about the suspected offences forming the basis of his arrest

Marriage breakdown financial disputes property and debt division