N. Sreenivasan : Straits Law Practice

Sreeni's father was an interpreter in the High Court and at the Police Courts. Growing up on legal anecdotes, his unrelentless and aggressive nature to steadfastly stand for what he believes in, instilled in him a passion for the law. His overriding commitment is to his client's cause, sometimes to the point of irritating others. Sreeni loves doing cases involving technical and accounting matters and expert evidence, where court craft can be enjoyed at its best. Sreeni is a Fellow of the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.

A doting (but somewhat absent) father of four children, Sreeni is constantly kept on his toes and cheekily reveals that he will have to deal with teenage children until he is 66, and must stay young!

Straits Law, to him, is an ideal. A place where law can be practiced ethically and enjoyed. It is a firm that has inculcated a collegiate atmosphere with a 'ready to dig in and take the bull by the horns' attitude.

N Sreenivasan can be contacted at 65141234 or at sreeni@straitslaw.com.sg


•	Intellectual Property & Information Technology
•	Corporate & Commercial Litigation
•	Alternative Dispute Resolution
•	Criminal Litigation
•	Building & Construction

Most Significant Legal Cases to Date

Zalco Marine
Sreeni was briefed to argue on the interpretation of the Norwegian Ship Sale Form. There were clearly binding decisions in England and Singapore; but the form had been slightly changed. Our argument was that the changes took the new form out of the previously decided cases. It succeeded and it was the first time the amended clause was interpreted in the Commonwealth.

Criminal Case involving a Lawyer friend "I was involved in a criminal case involving a lawyer friend, facing a serious charge. This was personally significant as I did some of the best cross-examination of my life. My client was acquitted in the end, and I actually cried in court."

Man v B&W
This case involved the supply of a marine engine. We lost at trial on facts and law and took up the legal issues on appeal. The matter, involved a chain of contracts with exclusions and limitations and the issues revolved around how these limited the duty of care owed by parties. The appeal went our way.