﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Dentons Rodyk - Insights]]></title><description>Dentons Rodyk Insights</description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/rss-feeds/insights</link><pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 15:29:27 GMT</pubDate><lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 10:25:00 GMT</lastBuildDate><language>en</language><item><title><![CDATA[“Neither a borrower nor a lender be?” — The SGCA clarifies the limits of winding-up jurisdiction where debts are subject to arbitration]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: The Singapore Court of Appeal&rsquo;s decision in <em>Singapore Commodities Group Co Pte Ltd v Founder Group (HK) Ltd</em> clarifies the limits of insolvency proceedings where debts are subject to arbitration agreements, reaffirming that such disputes should ordinarily be resolved by the agreed tribunal. It underscores that an unresolved arbitral dispute may deprive a creditor of standing to invoke the court&rsquo;s winding up jurisdiction, absent clear and unequivocal admission of liability. </p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/may/11/neither-a-borrower-nor-a-lender-be</link><pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/may/11/neither-a-borrower-nor-a-lender-be</guid><category>Arbitration</category><category>Litigation and Dispute Resolution</category><category>Commercial Litigation</category><category>Financial Services Litigation</category><category>Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy</category><category>Arbitration in Singapore</category><category>Litigation and Dispute Resolution in Singapore</category><category>Commercial Litigation in Singapore</category><category>Financial Services Litigation in Singapore</category><category>Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/istock-494310105.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Key legislative changes brought in by the Corporate and Accounting Laws (Amendment) Act 2025]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: This article highlights the key reforms introduced under the Corporate and Accounting Laws (Amendment) Act 2025, with the first tranche taking effect on 6 May 2026, aimed at strengthening corporate governance, enhancing accountability and shareholder protection, and streamlining compliance for companies.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/may/6/key-legislative-changes-brought-in-by-the-corporate-and-accounting-laws-amendment-act-2025</link><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/may/6/key-legislative-changes-brought-in-by-the-corporate-and-accounting-laws-amendment-act-2025</guid><category>Corporate</category><category>Corporate in Singapore</category><category>Government</category><category>Public sector</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/istock-1017599788.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Taxability of employment payments]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: In this client alert, we offer insights into Singapore cases on the taxability of employment related payments, with particular focus on <em>UZF v Comptroller of Income Tax</em>. The cases underscore that substance, not form, and the capacity in which a payment is received are key to its tax treatment.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/april/20/taxability-of-employment-payments</link><pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/april/20/taxability-of-employment-payments</guid><category>Corporate</category><category>Employment and Labor</category><category>Workers Compensation</category><category>Tax</category><category>Corporate in Singapore</category><category>Employment and Labor in Singapore</category><category>Worker’s Compensation in Singapore</category><category>Tax in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/texture/adobestock_64647360.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[All that glitters is not listed: The case for private bonds]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: In the era of rising interest rates and with geopolitical uncertainties causing jitters in the banking world, bonds are (and some would say, have always been) a viable option for businesses to attract capital. Given the stringent requirements which potential issuers are required to comply with to issue listed or retail bonds, issuing non-public, non-listed or non-retail bonds (referred to in this article as &lsquo;private bonds&rsquo;) to a select group of investors is becoming a feasible alternative.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/april/9/all-that-glitters-is-not-listed-the-case-for-private-bonds</link><pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/april/9/all-that-glitters-is-not-listed-the-case-for-private-bonds</guid><category>Finance</category><category>Finance in Singapore</category><category>Capital Markets</category><category>Capital Markets in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/adobestock_313838446.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Empowering women through succession planning – Why it matters more than ever]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: Succession planning isn&rsquo;t just about assets. It&rsquo;s about empowerment, clarity, and peace of mind. As more women become primary decision makers, wealth creators, and even sole caregivers, succession planning is no longer a &ldquo;nice to have&rdquo; &mdash; it&rsquo;s essential. Having a clear, thoughtful plan ensures that your intentions are respected and loved ones are protected.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/march/10/empowering-women-through-succession-planning-why-it-matters-more-than-ever</link><pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/march/10/empowering-women-through-succession-planning-why-it-matters-more-than-ever</guid><category>Estate and Trust Planning</category><category>Estate and Trust Planning</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/adobestock_231552591.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Budget 2026 tax developments]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: Singapore&rsquo;s Budget 2026 affirms continued implementation of Pillar Two while introducing measures to sustain its competitiveness. In this client alert, we outline the key tax developments affecting multinational enterprises and high-net-worth individuals.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/february/24/budget-2026-tax-developments</link><pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/february/24/budget-2026-tax-developments</guid><category>Tax</category><category>Tax in Singapore</category><category>Trusts, Estates and Wealth Preservation</category><category>Trusts, Estates and Wealth Preservation in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/aerial/istock-596391396.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Singapore’s simplified insolvency programme 2.0: From pandemic measure to permanent architecture]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>:&nbsp;With effect from <strong>29 January 2026</strong>, Singapore has replaced the temporary COVID era Simplified Insolvency Programme (SIP 1.0) with a permanent framework embedded within the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act (IRDA). The revamped iteration (SIP 2.0) marks a clear transition: what began as emergency relief has now been absorbed into the core design of Singapore&rsquo;s insolvency system for small and relatively straightforward cases. This update outlines the structural shifts introduced by SIP 2.0, and considers their broader implications for how small corporate distress is expected to be addressed going forward.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/february/3/singapores-simplified-insolvency-programme-20-from-pandemic-measure-to-permanent-architecture</link><pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/february/3/singapores-simplified-insolvency-programme-20-from-pandemic-measure-to-permanent-architecture</guid><category>Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy</category><category>Restructuring, Insolvency and Bankruptcy in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/adobestock_393569840.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Dentons Rodyk Reporter Issue 01 (2026)]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: Welcome to the 1st issue of the 2026 Dentons Rodyk Reporter.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/newsletters/2026/january/14/dentons-rodyk-reporter/dentons-rodyk-reporter-issue-01-2026</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/newsletters/2026/january/14/dentons-rodyk-reporter/dentons-rodyk-reporter-issue-01-2026</guid><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/other/newsmakers.ashx?sc_lang=en?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[Securing value in private equity M&A: Bespoke protections and W&I insurance insights]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>: Private equity investors bring unique priorities to M&amp;A transactions, emphasizing speed, deal certainty, and a clean exit. This article explores bespoke contractual protections and the critical role of warranty and indemnity (W&amp;I) insurance in aligning risk allocation with PE objectives, while addressing common coverage gaps and practical solutions. By adopting disciplined process management and early W&amp;I engagement, PE clients can better secure value, minimize residual liabilities, and close deals with confidence.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/january/14/securing-value-in-private-equity-ma</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/january/14/securing-value-in-private-equity-ma</guid><category>Corporate</category><category>Corporate in Singapore</category><category>Mergers and Acquisitions</category><category>Mergers and Acquisitions in Singapore</category><category>Private Equity</category><category>Private Equity in Singapore</category><category>Navigating the legal landscape:&lt;br /&gt;Outlook on trends affecting the Canadian and global markets</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/abstract/istock-157444397.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item><item><title><![CDATA[A Privy Council reset for proving deceit without awareness]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Singapore</strong>:&nbsp;In <em>Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd v Ivanishvili and others</em> [2025] UKPC 53, the Board of the Privy Council held that &ldquo;conscious awareness&rdquo; of the representation is not a required element of deceit. This is especially significant for implied representations and concealed fraud, where a claimant may be influenced to act to its detriment through an induced assumption or belief, without giving conscious thought to the representation. This article explores the decision and considers its implications for Singapore law.</p>]]></description><link>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/january/13/a-privy-council-reset-for-proving-deceit-without-awareness</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>https://dentons.rodyk.com/en/insights/alerts/2026/january/13/a-privy-council-reset-for-proving-deceit-without-awareness</guid><category>Commercial Litigation</category><category>Commercial Litigation in Singapore</category><category>ASEAN</category><category>Singapore</category><media:thumbnail url="https://dentons.rodyk.com/-/media/images/website/background-images/gpof/texture/istock-890868282.ashx?h=140&amp;mh=140&amp;mw=180&amp;w=177" height="140" width="177" /></item></channel></rss>