Many large-scale projects face exceptional challenges and coordination of local and cross-border issues—including structuring and financing concerns, government regulations, engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) and other contractual issues—is particularly daunting.

Our Project Finance practice provides you with comprehensive legal solutions covering all issues, from the structuring and inception of a project through commercial operation.

Rely on our extensive experience serving several industry sectors, including oil and gas, petrochemicals, power, telecommunications and technology, mining, airports, utilities, water, rail, paper and housing.

Benefit from capabilities that include advising and assisting in the procurement of financing and refinancing, as well as drafting and negotiation of financing, security and project documents, the management of performance risks and the use of credit enhancements to improve structural credit or to shift counterparty risks.

Key service areas:

• Compliance and regulatory advice
• Plant construction
• Public Private Partnerships (PPP)
• Public procurement

Recognition

Dentons Rodyk achieves improved rankings in IFLR1000 2019

November 7, 2018

Dentons Rodyk is pleased to share that 20 of our lawyers and 10 practice areas have been recognised in the 2019 edition of IFLR1000.

Insights

Understanding the new Singapore Infrastructure Dispute-Management Protocol

October 26, 2018

On 23 October 2018, the Ministry of Law launched a new Singapore Infrastructure Dispute-Management Protocol to help parties involved in mega infrastructure projects manage disputes and minimise the risks of time and cost overruns. Minister for Finance Mr Heng Swee Keat announced the launch of the new protocol at Enterprise Singapore’s Asia-Singapore Infrastructure Roundtable as part of efforts to establish Singapore as the infrastructure hub of Asia.

Recent developments on moneylending

May 18, 2018

In the recent case of Ang Ai Tee v Resource Credit [2017] SGHC 159, the High Court set aside the defendant’s statutory demand for repayment of debt on the ground that the loan refinancing scheme imposed excessive interest and that the loan transactions were unconscionable or substantially unfair.