Three cases from Singapore that list-members might be interested in:

 

Following one of my earlier emails regarding the New Zealand Supreme Court's judgment in Dysart Timbers, the High Court of Singapore in Norwest Holdings Pte Ltd (in liquidation) v Newport Mining Ltd [2010] SGHC 144 deals with the question of the applicable doctrines when the circumstances in which an offer is made change materially prior to acceptance. The approach in Dysart Timbers is referred to, but not adopted.

 

In the "Asia Star" [2010] SGCA 12, the Singapore Court of Appeal has held that a contracting party suing for breach of contract is required to notify the defaulting party of any action it proposes to take in order to mitigate its losses. There is also a question on the facts of whether the actions taken by the innocent party in mitigation were reasonable.

 

Consideration is given in Carriernet Global Ltd v Abkey Pte Ltd [2010] SGHC 104 to s 2(1) of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act, which is identical to the English Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. The question here was whether a third party suing for damages for breach of contract, under s 2(1) of the Act, could be said to be "enforc[ing] a term of the contract", when the payment of contractual damages was not the subject of any specific term of the contract.

 

In case any of the above links don't work, the judgments may also be found in a list here.