Suggestions
Khelvin Xu
Problem-solving lawyer. Complex commercial disputes (cross-border and tech). Director, Covenant Chambers LLC.
Khelvin Xu is a Director at Covenant Chambers LLC and serves on the Advocacy Committee of The Law Society of Singapore.13 Some key points about Khelvin Xu:
Professional Background
- He spent 15 years at one of the Big Four law firms in Singapore, where he was a partner specializing in commercial litigation and arbitration.2
- He is now a Director at Covenant Chambers LLC, combining his big firm expertise with a more flexible chambers model.2
- His practice focuses on complex and cross-border commercial disputes, particularly those involving technology-related issues.2
Role at The Law Society of Singapore
- Khelvin is a member of the Advocacy Committee, which is a Standing Committee of The Law Society of Singapore.14
- He serves as the General Secretary of the Advocacy Committee.3
- As a seasoned advocacy trainer, he regularly conducts advocacy training sessions.45
Expertise and Specializations
- Khelvin is known for his expertise in commercial litigation and arbitration.2
- He handles cases involving B2B disputes, shareholder agreements, minority oppression, directors' duties, and employment issues.2
- He is a certified Mediation Advocate under the International Mediation Institute.2
Khelvin Xu combines his extensive legal experience with a commitment to advocacy training, contributing to the development of advocacy skills within the Singaporean legal community through his roles at Covenant Chambers and The Law Society of Singapore.
Highlights
On debt recovery, defamation, and damages: part 5.¹
To recap: (a) at Mr Chan's request, Ms Tang loaned $120,000; (b) the loans were not repaid. Ms Tang engaged a debt collection company; (c) Mr Chan successfully sued Ms Tang and the debt collection company for defamation - but was only awarded $1 in damages; and (d) each party is probably out of pocket. And Mr Chan is bankrupt.
I conclude this series with final² learning points for commercially-minded businesses and businesspeople.
--
2️⃣ Choose who you sue carefully.
Here, the Court held that Ms Tang's loans were to Mr Chan's companies and not Mr Chan himself. As such, Ms Tang's claim³ against Mr Chan for the return of the loans failed.
So consider carefully, and with legal advice, who your claims should be brought against - especially in circumstances where the documentation is patchy,⁴ and it is unclear whether the transaction was entered into with: (a) the person you dealt with; (b) someone represented by the agent who you dealt with; or even (c) a corporate entity whose representative you dealt with.
Some of you might then say: "well, what the heck, I'll just sue them all!"
You could. But there are risks.
If you take a shotgun approach and sue every involved party: (a) your legal costs escalate; and (b) if there are parties you do not succeed against, you may have to compensate them for their legal costs.
So choose the right targets before pulling the trigger.
3️⃣ Choose carefully whether to bring defamation claims.
Consider again the figures that I set out in part 3.⁵
For those of us whose reputations have been harmed by a defamatory statement, but who don't happen to be public figures, suing for defamation often leads to a pyrrhic victory at best.
Let's assume that a victim of defamation has a 100% chance of succeeding, but (a) their expected damages are unlikely to exceed $50k; (b) their legal costs (for a full trial) are likely to be close to $100k; and (c) the costs they can recover from the other party are unlikely to exceed $30k.
In this scenario, if the victim sues, they end up out of pocket - and even in the best-case scenario where they succeed completely in their defamation claim.⁶
Now, you may prepared to pay the financial price to vindicate your reputation. I respect that.
But go in with your eyes open, and find a set of lawyers who: (a) will not overpromise and create unrealistic expectations; (b) actively work to keep costs under control, such as through Alternative Dispute Resolution and by not taking out unnecessary interlocutory applications; and (c) actually understand the intricacies of defamation claims and defences.⁷
Because once you have commenced a Court claim, you can't just drop it whenever you want to, and even if you change your mind later on.
--
For those of you who are still here with me, at the end of this multi-part series - I hope you enjoyed the ride.
As usual, #footnotes in comments.
#defamation #litigation #notlegaladvice
On remote work: ruminations and reflections.
The Law Gazette's Mass Call special edition 2024, just published, includes my piece on how young lawyers can navigate the hybrid workplace.¹ Many thanks to The Law Society of Singapore's Publications Committee and Divyesh Menon for the invitation and support.
I share below some personal thoughts which did not make the final cut.²
--
1️⃣ For those of us who started legal practice before Covid hit in 2020, and before hybrid work was even a thing, it is easy to take for granted just how much attitudes and technical adoption have improved over the last 4 years.
When I first started practice, I was regularly spending 14 - 15 hours a day in the office every weekday, and maybe another 3 - 4 hours on most weekends.³ Those numbers have dropped dramatically - with no discernable impact on output or efficiency (or so I think), but leading to an outsized increase in the time I'm able to spend with my family.
It's easier than ever to conduct meetings online,⁴ access documents remotely, work at a place and time of our choosing, right-size our office spaces... the list goes on.
So perhaps there's some value in counting our blessings, and identifying some small long-term benefits that we've been able to extract from the Covid crisis.
2️⃣ But at the same time, the rise of hybrid work has also coincided with a period of massive change and uncertainty.
For many of us, the last 4 years have been challenging in various ways. Think back to April 2020, and the all-pervasive fear and uncertainty:
- Will I get Covid?
- When can I see my family and friends again?
- Will I lose my job?
- Heck, will the economy even survive such that there will be jobs?
The widespread adoption of video conferencing for Court hearings has also significantly changed the way disputes practitioners (like myself) advocate.⁵ And don't forget that our young colleagues have had to struggle through remote learning.
So perhaps there's some value in reflecting on our individual journeys of change and growth over the last 4 years, and giving ourselves a little credit.
3️⃣ It's funny how things come full circle.
The last (and only other) time I wrote a piece for the Law Gazette was back in January 2013, and it was for "The Young Lawyer" column.⁶ Here we are now, more than a decade later, with a piece for young lawyers.
I can assure you that back when I was doing my pupillage,⁷ if you'd told me that I'd still be in private practice 15 years down the road, I would have scoffed in your face. Little did I know.
So perhaps there's some value in taking life as it comes instead of holding onto our plans too tightly, and always being open to the full range of possibilities and opportunities that come our way.
--
To my freshly-called colleagues: congratulations.
To all my colleagues: hang in there, keeping fighting the good fight, and have some fun along the way.
As usual, #footnotes in comments.
#lawyers #remotework #notlegaladvice
