
Publication
New Nasdaq and NYSE rules on use of reverse stock splits
Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) maintain certain minimum requirements that companies must meet before listing a security.
Singapore | Publication | March 2025
Reproduced from Practical Law with the permission of the publishers. For further information visit www.practicallaw.com.
In DMZ v DNA [2025] SGHC 31, the Singapore High Court held that the SIAC Registrar was entitled to revise their decision on the commencement date of an arbitration. Parties to SIAC arbitrations waive their rights to appeal or challenge such decisions under the SIAC Rules and an application to the court for a declaration setting aside such decisions amounted to an impermissible back-door appeal.
The Singapore High Court (SGHC) has held that it had no jurisdiction to review a decision of the SIAC Registrar revising the commencement date of an arbitration.
A dispute arose between the parties to four sales contracts and an extension agreement (Agreements), each containing a SIAC arbitration clause. On 24 June 2024, one party (claimant) filed a notice of arbitration (NOA) at SIAC.
On 3 July 2024, at the SIAC Registrar's request, the claimant clarified that it was invoking the arbitration agreements under each of the Agreements. Under rule 3.3 of the SIAC Rules 2016, the commencement date of an arbitration is the date that the Registrar receives the complete NOA. Following the claimant's clarification, the Registrar issued a letter stating that the commencement date was 3 July, which gave rise to an alleged time-bar defence from the respondent. The claimant requested that the Registrar revise the commencement date to 24 June, which the Registrar did (Revision), despite the respondent's protests.
The respondent applied to the SGHC to set aside the Revision.
The SGHC dismissed the application, finding:
However, the court noted that the Registrar's decisions are not wholly unimpeachable, and they must exercise their powers in a lawful manner, in accordance with the SIAC Rules. Article 34(2)(a)(iv) of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides a basis on which an award may be set aside because the arbitral procedure was contrary to the parties' agreement.
Case: DMZ v DNA [2025] SGHC 31 (25 February 2025) (Hri Kumar Nair J)
Publication
Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) maintain certain minimum requirements that companies must meet before listing a security.
Publication
On February 20, 2025, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) published the Capital and Liquidity Treatment of Crypto-asset Exposures (Banking) - Guideline (the Banking Guideline), and the Capital Treatment of Crypto-asset Exposures (Insurance) - Guideline (the Insurance Guideline, and together with the Banking Guideline, the Guidelines).
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025