“Adrian explains clearly, well and provides practical advice. We have always had good experiences working with him and his team and often turn to him for complex matters.” – The Legal 500
Adrian heads the Dispute Resolution Group and has oversight of all disputes practices in the firm.
Called to the Bar in 2000, Adrian has been described as “thorough, smart and responsive” and he is recognised in various legal publications for his experience and expertise as counsel in complex commercial cases.
Adrian is recognised globally as a “National Leader” in Southeast Asia by Lexology Index for his expertise in Commercial Litigation. He is also highly rated by The Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2025 and identified as a “Litigation Star” by Benchmark Litigation Asia-Pacific 2025.
His practice spans a range of civil litigation areas including commercial fraud, securities-related and banking claims, joint venture and shareholder disputes, succession and trust law, real property (including en-bloc sale litigation) as well as construction and projects.
As Adrian is effectively bilingual in English and Mandarin, he is frequently retained to act in matters involving Chinese law as well as Chinese parties. Adrian is also active in international arbitrations, both as counsel and arbitrator.
EXPERIENCE
International Arbitration
- Acting for a client, a US corporation, in an arbitration claim arising from a contract for the supply of a military drone system developed for national security purposes. The purchaser of the system (i.e. the respondent in the arbitration) has alleged that the system did not met contractual specifications and that this alleged failure posed intolerable operational risks. The client, being an experienced supplier of such drone systems, has cited examples of other international and successful users of its systems. Another complication in the matter is the security and integrity of parts of the supplied system, which were called into question, after various missile drones were damaged while in the respondent’s custody (prior to formal commissioning of the system).
- Acting in an international arbitration claim concerning an original equipment manufacturing agreement for the supply and distribution of surface mounter machines used in the electronics industry. Damages in excess of EU$40 million were sought for the clients (who were distributors in various international markets) against the equipment supplier for breach of contract and conspiracy to erode market share. In the course of the arbitration, the equipment supplier was forced to admit that its employees had undertaken forbidden sales of machines and had forged documents in an attempt to hide the wrongful sales. In addition to various technical issues relating to the surface mounter machines, complex issues of Singapore, German and Japanese law were explored in these proceedings.
- Representing two subsidiaries of a Singapore-listed company in an international arbitration claim against their Indonesian and Dutch joint venture partners. The joint venture business between the parties, which was the subject-matter of the arbitration, involved the construction, installation and maintenance of base transmission stations for mobile phone networks in Indonesia. Apart from the highly technical nature of the matter, complex issues of Indonesian law were also raised in these proceedings.
- Acting for a subsidiary of a Singapore-listed company in an arbitration claim by its joint venture partner in connection with the financing, construction and operation of a coal-fire power generation facility in Anhui, China.
Banking & Commercial
- Defending a bank in a highly publicised claim brought in the name of a wealthy 92-year old customer for breach of duty. The bank considered the customer mentally incapable of providing valid instructions and refused to allow the operation of the customer’s accounts. The High Court accepted that the bank did not breach its mandate and concluded that “the Bank admirably acted to ensure payment was made only if it had the actual mandate from its customer…The Bank did the right thing by its conduct and lived up to its social responsibilities in this case”. The High Court decision, which was the first reported banking case in Singapore involving suspected elderly fraud, was subsequently upheld by the Singapore Court of Appeal.
- Successfully resisted a S$5 billion claim in conspiracy to recover loss suffered in connection with a Seoul High Court judgment. This was in spite of an earlier decision holding that the judgment was enforceable against the defendant in the Korean proceedings (Sang Cheol Woo v Charles Choi Spackman and ors [2022] SGHC 298). After we applied for and obtained leave to amend the client’s Defence to include the averment that the claimant had entered into a contingency fee arrangement with his Korean counsel which resulted in the claim being tainted by maintenance and/or champerty, the claimant withdrew his claim.
- Successfully represented clients at first instance before the Income Tax Review Board in appeals against the decision of the Comptroller of Income Tax. In this landmark case, the Board held that the Comptroller wrongly classified certain payments arising from a sale and purchase agreement of company shares as employment income, resulting in an excessive amount of income tax paid. The clients were held to be quasi-owners of the company and the payments in question were made to them in consideration of the warranties and undertakings given by them to the buyer of the shares. As a result of the Board’s decision, around S$5m would have to be refunded by the Comptroller to the clients.
- Representing clients in a case that clarified the limits of a law enforcement agency’s power to withhold property seized for the purposes of criminal investigations. In a ground breaking decision that settled the approach to be applied by the court when presented with an application to extend the period of such aforesaid seizure, the High Court found that the clients suffered serious injustice and ordered the immediate release of the seized properties.
- Acting against the Official Assignee in a landmark case where the Court of Appeal recognised the doctrine of abandonment as part of Singapore law and applied it, for the first time, to intangible property. The decision by the Court of Appeal laid down the test to be adopted for the doctrine of abandonment to be invoked and is also the first case in Singapore to have considered the effect of s 346 of the Companies Act.
Trust & Estate Disputes
- Representing beneficiaries of the estate of a well-known entrepreneur and Chinese community leader in Singapore (who passed away in the 1960s) in a series of contentious proceedings (spanning decades) involving various executors of the estate as well as family companies. To date, the estate has not been fully administered. Related court proceedings included Singapore’s last appeal to the Privy Council.
- Acting in a series of contentious proceedings and related inheritance disputes, spanning almost a decade, in connection with the estate of a property tycoon worth more than S$400 million.
- Successfully acted for a high net worth individual against her daughter’s claim for beneficial interest in more than 20 properties in Singapore in which the latter was registered as owner. In dismissing the daughter’s claim, the High Court found that the client held full beneficial interest in the properties on the basis of a common intention constructive trust as well as a resulting trust.
Construction & Real Property
- Acting as instructed counsel in the first reported Singapore Court of Appeal decision on the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act and in related proceedings.
- Retained as instructed counsel in proceedings involving various explosions arising from taped joint failures in power cables. The failures were observed on copper and aluminum XLPE cables which connected power stations and sealing ends on copper cables.
- Representing majority owners to successfully obtain a sale order from the High Court for the en bloc sale of a 500,000 sq ft site for S$610 million, which was opposed inter alia on the basis that there was misrepresentation by the marketing agent on the applicable development charge payable by the purchaser. In the course of settling various issues of law concerning the en bloc sale regime, the Court of Appeal declared that it was for the objectors to the collective sale to prove lack of good faith in the transaction. This remains the leading Singapore authority on the collective sale regime in Singapore.
- Representing the plaintiff main contractor in its claims against the defendant subcontractor for breach of contract and negligence in the Singapore High Court in connection with the design and construction of a semi-submersible accommodation unit. In this case, the defendant was awarded a subcontract for inter alia the assembly of pontoons for the said vessel. Following the completion of the works by the defendant, numerous defects were detected at various locations of the pontoons, including but not limited to welding defects at the structurally sensitive areas of the vessel. This matter involves complex disputes of fact, which would necessitate the calling of significant expert evidence on the extent of the defects and necessity of repairs.
Court Judgments
Written grounds of decision have been issued for the following matters handled by Adrian over the past five years:
- The Law Society of Singapore v Chan Chun Hwee Allan [2025] SGDT 12
- UZF and CLQ v Comptroller of Income Tax [2025] SGITBR 4
- Jenny Prawesti v Sauw Tjiauw Koe [2025] SGHC 209
- Campbell Hospitality Pte Ltd and other v Marchmont Pte Ltd and another appeal [2025] 1 SLR 816
- Affert Resources Pte Ltd (in compulsory winding up) v Industries Chimiques du Senegal and another [2024] SGHC 57
- Seatrium New Energy Ltd (formerly known as Keppel FELS Ltd) v HJ Shipbuilding & Construction Co, Ltd (formerly known as Hanjin Heavy Industries and Construction Co Ltd) [2024] SGHC(A) 26 (Appellate Division of the High Court); [2023] SGHC 264 (General Division of the High Court)
- CSO v CSP and another [2024] 5 SLR 1079
- Ethoz Capital Ltd v Im8ex Pte Ltd and others [2023] 1 SLR 922 (Court of Appeal); [2022] SGHC 12 (High Court)
- Law Society of Singapore v Ooi Oon Tat [2023] 3 SLR 966 (affirming The Law Society of Singapore v Ooi Oon Tat [2021] SGDT 13)
- Cosmetic Care Asia Ltd and others v Sri Linarti Sasmito [2021] SGHC 157
MEMBERSHIPS / DIRECTORSHIPS
- Panel Member, Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents (2015 to 2022)
- Board Member, Competition Appeals Board (2019 to 2021)
PUBLICATIONS
- Contributing editor, Chapter on “Judicial Review”, Lexis Practical Guidance (Singapore Dispute Resolution) (2016)
- Co-author, “Judicial Review of SGX-ST’s Public Reprimand Powers: Yeap Wai Kong v Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Ltd [2012] 3 SLR 565”, Singapore Academy of Law Journal (September 2012), Singapore Academy of Law
- Contributing editor, “The Commentary to Order 24 of the Rules of Court (Discovery and Inspection of Documents)”, Singapore Civil Procedure 2013, Sweet & Maxwell Singapore (2012)
- Co-author, “Discovery and Cross-examination Challenges in International Arbitrations : a Singapore Perspective”, New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, New York State Bar Association (2011)
- Contributing editor, Halsbury’s Laws of Singapore: Banking and Finance, LexisNexis (Singapore) (2011) – updated the chapters on negotiable instruments and syndicated loans
