Prakaash has been involved in many high-profile and complex matters. Here are just a few:

Commercial Litigation / Arbitration

• Acting in a US$300 million ICSID investment arbitration in relation to the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement.

• Successfully acted for an Indian edtech company to defend interim relief sought by the investment arm of a Middle Eastern country’s sovereign wealth fund in relation to a dispute over an option transaction amounting to approximately US$235 million.

• Successfully acted before the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) to resist attempts to set aside arbitration awards involving claims in excess of US$108 million. The decision by Justice Simon Thorley QC, sitting as an International Judge of the SICC, is reported in CEV v CEC and others [2020] SGHC(I) 11.

• Acting for a trade finance bank in pursuing recovery actions against Hin Leong Trading Pte Ltd and its associated entities. The matter involves allegations of fraud and involves exposure of approximately US$3.85 billion to 23 banks. Representing the bank in ongoing interpleader proceedings which involves multiple parties claiming on sale proceeds of various shipments of oil cargoes in excess of US$370 million.

• Acting for a Singapore-based oil company to defend claims in excess of US$200 million arising from alleged off-specification cargoes. The oil cargoes supplied under the sale contracts were blended by the buyers in Singapore and subsequently suppled as bunkers to approximately 200 ships that called at Singapore in March 2022, out of which 80 have reported issues with their fuel pumps and engines.

• Advised a Singapore-based oil trader on their potential liability arising out of the fraud which was committed by its counterparty. During investigations, it turned up that the counterparty’s employee(s) had forged non-existent sale and purchase agreements and guarantee documents in the client’s name for the purpose of obtaining financing from several reputable financial institutions. Assisted the client to successfully resist claims by these financial institutions by corresponding with the banks and setting out the fraud that had been perpetrated on them. This was an extremely good outcome for the clients as they also had existing relationships with the financial institutions and were able to avoid contentious litigation which would have put a strain on their banking relationships.

• Successfully assisted a leading Indian steel company to resist an arbitration setting aside application at first instance and before the Court of Appeal. The first instance judgement is reported in DBL v DBM [2023] SGHC 267 and the Court of Appeal judgement is reported in DBL v DBM [2024] SGCA 19.

• Successfully acted for a Singapore based commodity trader in a stay application under the International Arbitration Act which involved the application of the extended Fiona Trust principle. The appeal was heard by Justice Choo Han Teck and his decision is reported in Tsudakoma Corp v Global Trade Well Pte Ltd [2023] SGHC 26.

Sanctions

• Assisting a Dubai based oil trader in its claim against a European shipowner for conversion of its cargo arising from a DOJ seizure order. Successfully resisted a rare form of anti-suit injunction, an anti-anti-arbitration injunction, which was intended to discharge an anti-arbitration injunction we had obtained from the Malaysian Courts. The English Court judgement is reported in Euronav Shipping NV v Black Swan Petroleum DMCC [2024] EWHC 896 (Comm). The case involves interesting issues of the extraterritoriality of US sanctions laws as well as its interplay with the EU Blocking regulations. There are multiple legal proceedings afoot in Malaysia, London, the United States and in the European Union.

• Assisting a Singapore based oil trader with its delisting petition to OFAC and also the disputes that have arisen with its counterparties at the time that it was designated. One of the disputes involved a cargo of naphta valued at approximately US$ 25 million on board a vessel which refused to discharge cargo back to clients. Worked with English counsel to ensure that sale proceeds were ordered to be paid into the English Court instead of to an OFAC blocked account. The English Court judgement is reported in O v C[2024] EWHC 2838 (Comm).

• Successfully acted for the owners of US$100 million worth of cargo to tranship the cargo laden on board a vessel that grounded near the gas pipeline between Singapore and Indonesia and was subsequently sanctioned by OFAC and detained by the Indonesian authorities.

• Acted on behalf of buyers under a ship sale & purchase contract to recover deposits paid to escrow agents when there were allegations that buyers were involved in sanctioned activity.

• Represented several companies to submit applications to OFAC to unblock or remove the restrictions on funds that have been blocked or restricted due to OFAC sanctions.

• Assisted a multinational company in the oil and gas trade with investigations into apparent violations of sanctions against North Korea.

• Advising companies and individuals on matters involving international and unilateral sanctions against Iran, Russia, Myanmar, Venezuela, Syria and North Korea.

Shipping

• Acting for the International Oil Pollution Compensation (IOPC) Funds in relation to the oil spill in Singapore waters arising from the collision between the Marine Honour and the Vox Maxima. This is the first limitation fund being set up with regard to oil pollution in Singapore pursuant to the 1992 CLC.

• Acting for an oil terminal in Singapore in relation to its US$22 million claim against a vessel owner arising from an allision. The matter involves complex issues relating to the quantification of damages arising from the business interruption losses suffered by the terminal.

• Successfully acted for the shipping subsidiary of the national oil company of Indonesia in defending a claim for US$ 25 million under a long-term time charter.

• Assisting a shipowner to prosecute a claim exceeding US$ 56 million against the national oil company of Venezuela for outstanding amounts owed under 6 charterparties.

• Acting for various regional and international energy trading companies on misdelivery claims exceeding US$230 million. Successful in obtaining unconditional leave to defend in several actions proceeding before the Singapore Courts, including (i) The Miracle Hope (unreported), (ii) Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) Ltd v Maersk Tankers Singapore Pte Ltd (Winson Oil Trading Pte Ltd, intervener)[2022] SGHC 242, and (iii) The “STI Orchard” (Winson Oil Trading Pte Ltd, intervener) [2022] SGHCR 6, which has been affirmed on appeal (unreported).

• Successfully acted for bunker barge owners to defeat a misdelivery claim in the landmark decision of The “Luna” and another appeal[2021] SGCA 84. The Singapore Court of Appeal held that documents labelled “bills of lading” issued by local bunker barge operators were not true bills of lading that evidenced contracts of carriage or functioned as documents of title.

• Acted for a Chinese shipowner in attempting to resist a US$8 million claim by a financial institution for misdelivery of cargo. The case involved novel issues on ‘spent’ bills of lading and interpretation of the Singapore Bills of Lading Act. The case is reported in The “Yue You 902”[2019] SGHC 106.

• Successfully acted for Drydocks World – Dubai LLC (in its capacity as a mortgagee) to get payment out from the proceeds of the judicial sale of the “Ambassador”. The case is reported in The “Ambassador” [2023] SGHC 2.

• Successfully acted for the world’s largest cash buyers to defeat a setting aside application taken out by one of its counterparties to an agreement for the sale and purchase of a vessel. The decision is reported in Haide Building Materials Co Ltd v Ship Recycling Investments Inc [2024] SGHC 222.

• Acted for two trading companies in their pursuit of multi-million dollar claims across multiple jurisdictions in the wake of payment default from one of their customers who is a substantial player in the log industry. Formulated a coordinated strategy for recovery which involved the arrest of 5 vessels in Singapore, New Zealand and Australia within the space of 1 month. Successfully assisted clients to obtain an arbitration award against 1 of the shipowners (who had appointed a prominent King’s Counsel for the conduct of its defence) and also to settle the claims against several other shipowners.

• Successfully acted on behalf of Canada’s largest ocean-going, dry-bulk shipowning and chartering company to take out an anti-suit injunction against insurers in Philippines bringing a subrogated cargo claim.

• Acted as lead counsel in a 10-day Singapore High Court trial on behalf of the trading arm of a multinational conglomerate to defend a claim brought by Chinese shipowners over a dispute on the unauthorised issuance of bills of lading which resulted in the arrest of the vessel in India. The dispute involves various interesting issues relating to the law on conspiracy, dishonest assistance, agency and vicarious liability.

• Acted on behalf of a Swiss-based group of companies for a claim on a refund guarantee issued in respect of a shipbuilding contract entered into with one of Vietnam’s largest shipyards.

• Acted on behalf of a charterer of a vessel (who were also the owners of the cargo onboard) to release a vessel arrested by a consortium of 5 mortgagee banks to enforce their mortgage and recover USS$118 million. This issue had never been decided by the Singapore Courts and this case would have been instructive a on how the Singapore Courts will decide to strike the balance between two innocent parties, this being the mortgagee banks and cargo interests. The matter was heard before a Judge but before a decision was issued, there was a settlement reached between the parties which involved the release of the vessel such that it could proceed to the discharge port and discharge clients’ cargo.

• Acted for clients in relation to remodification works which were carried on an FPSO in a Singapore shipyard. The contracts provided for the work to be completed by the second half of 2021 but there was substantial delay to the works. Clients were required to deliver the refurbished FPSO to their client in India and required the FPSO to sail out of Singapore by 20 November 2022. There were concerns that the shipyard would not cooperate to complete a handover of the FPSO to clients and allow the sail away of the FPSO. Assisted clients with respect to the commercial negotiations with the shipyard and formulated a strategy which allowed for the FPSO to sail away on time. Also provided clients with the options available to them in SIAC arbitration (the dispute resolution mechanism provided for in the contracts) and in the Singapore Courts should the commercial negotiations with the shipyard fail.

Marine Insurance

• Acted in a claim against insurers for constructive total loss. The matter involved technical and complex issues relating to marine insurance and was heard by Justice Jeremy Lionel Cooke, sitting as an international judge in the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC). The SICC judgement is reported: PT Adidaya Energy Mandiri v MS First Capital Insurance Pte Ltd [2022] 4 SLR 371.

International Trade

• Successfully represented Singapore-based commodity traders in dozens of GAFTA arbitrations.

• Successfully acted on behalf of a leading coal trading company to take out an injunction before the Singapore Courts to stop payment on a Letter of Credit based on a fraud committed by the Indonesian shippers.

• Successfully acted for a beneficiary under a letter of credit to obtain payment of US$42 million from a Singapore bank who was refusing payment on grounds of alleged discrepancies in the documents presented for negotiation. We prepared a substantive letter to the bank, refuting each alleged discrepancy and citing ICC DOCDEX decisions which supported our position that there were no discrepancies. Within 2 days of the issuance of the letter, the bank made payment under the letter of credit.

Aviation

• Acted for a privately owned Myanmar airline in relation to claims brought under 8 aircraft leasing agreements for sums in excess of US$50 million. The claims were in relation to periods where the aircraft were grounded because of the COVID-19 pandemic. There were related Singapore High Court proceedings where the lessor had commended proceedings against the bank which had guaranteed the airlines’ payments under the agreements. Successfully negotiated a settlement through a mediation conducted under the auspices of the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC).

• Prakaash is ranked by Chambers Global & Chambers Asia-Pacific, where he is described as being “business-oriented and practical” and being well known in the market for his growing shipping litigation practice in Singapore. Clients have also commended him for possessing “a level of knowledge and sophistication that inspires confidence”.

• Prakaash is recognised as a key lawyer by The Legal 500 with client feedback that he provides “timely, practical, and focused solutions on a cost-effective basis” and that he is “extremely commercial and solutions-focused”.

• Asialaw Profiles ranks Prakaash as a “Distinguished Practitioner“ with client feedback that he “combines strong legal knowledge, strong legal skills and good client management” and “has a wide breadth of prior experience”. Clients also describe him as “likable, personable, approachable, helpful and very capable”.

• Benchmark Litigation Asia Pacific spotlighted Prakaash as a leading lawyer in its inaugural Top 40 under 40 list and awarded him the “Rising Star of the Year” in its 2024 Awards with client feedback that he is “a superb and highly knowledgeable legal practitioner who provides legal advice and solutions focused on the best possible outcome for the client, and not simply on what the law says”. 

• Best Lawyers recognised Prakaash as a leading individual in its 2026 edition of The Best Lawyers in Singapore.

• Prakaash was 1 out of only 3 lawyers who were recognised as an Accredited Specialist in Maritime and Shipping in 2022. The accreditation scheme serves as a mark of recognition for legal professional excellence in their specialised areas of practice. The newly minted accreditations were announced following a stringent year-long assessment process conducted by an independent selection committee, comprising judges and senior industry representatives.