USP Law LLC

𝗔 𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲. One of the most expensive misconceptions in commercial litigation: that winning is the finish line. It is not. Winning gets you an order. Getting paid is a separate fight — and if the other side has moved assets, gone quiet, or sits behind a web of entities in another jurisdiction, that fight can be harder than the one you just won. The businesses that recover well do the unglamorous work early: 🎯They ask "can this defendant actually pay?" before filing, not after. 🎯They think about asset tracing and freezing orders at the start. 🎯They pick a forum whose judgments or awards will actually be enforced where the money is. Enforcement is not the epilogue to a dispute. For anyone deciding whether to sue, it is the first question — 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗮 𝘄𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲. At USP Law LLC, we approach disputes with enforcement in mind from day one — because the real measure of litigation strategy is not just whether you can win, but whether you can recover. 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲: 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲: 𝗱𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲'𝘀 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲? Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #JudgmentWorthless #AwardEnforcement #EnforcementMatters #AssetTracing #InternationalArbitration #CrossBorderLitigation #DisputeResolution #USPLaw

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝘁-𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗺𝘆𝘁𝗵 𝘓𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 "𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨" 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴, 𝘪𝘯 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴, 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘴𝘺. Founders sign arbitration clauses assuming they work like court: lose, appeal, get a second look. They do not. 𝗔𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹. Courts will only set one aside in narrow circumstances — a jurisdiction defect, a breach of natural justice, an award that offends public policy. "The tribunal got the facts wrong" is not on the list. Singapore's courts made the point again this year, dismissing a set-aside bid in a commodities dispute and reaffirming just how high that threshold sits. Our Ushan Premaratne has been involved in numerous applications to set aside arbitral awards and related jurisdictional challenges over the past 15 years (see, for example, 𝘾𝙄𝙓 𝙫 𝘾𝙄𝙔 [2021] SGHC 53 and 𝙎𝙞𝙣𝙤𝙡𝙖𝙣𝙠𝙖 𝙃𝙤𝙩𝙚𝙡𝙨 & 𝙎𝙥𝙖 (𝙋𝙧𝙞𝙫𝙖𝙩𝙚) 𝙇𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙩𝙚𝙙 𝙫 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙖 𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙩 𝙎𝙥𝘼 [2018] SGHC 157). He is currently involved in two such matters: an appeal concerning jurisdiction in a cryptocurrency-related dispute, and an application to set aside a final award arising from a cross-border sale of goods transaction. The practical consequence: 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴  𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳. Get the tribunal right. Get the evidence right. Get the argument right the first time — because there is rarely a second. If your dispute strategy assumes a safety net that is not there, that's worth knowing before you are in front of the tribunal, not after. 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲: 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗳𝗶𝘅 𝗮 𝗯𝗮𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿? Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #Arbitration #InternationalArbitration #DisputeResolution #SingaporeLaw #CommercialLitigation #SIAC #ArbitralAwards #USPLaw

𝗙𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗴 Shareholder disputes rarely explode overnight. They smoulder — a missed board pack here, a related-party transaction there. By the time clients call us, the same five mistakes keep appearing: 🎯𝘝𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨. That angry email to your co-founder will be Exhibit A. Assume everything you write will be read aloud in court. 🎯𝘐𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. Your rights live in the company's constitution and the shareholders' agreement — not in what was 'always understood'. Read them before you act, not after. 🎯𝘚𝘦𝘭𝘧-𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱. Locking a director out of systems or diverting payments feels decisive. It usually hands the other side an oppression claim. 🎯𝘞𝘢𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨. Minority oppression remedies reward those who object contemporaneously. Silence gets characterised as acquiescence. 🎯𝘛𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘢𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘯𝘦𝘨𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘨e. Most shareholder disputes end in a buyout. The litigation is how the price gets set. The earlier strategy enters the picture, the more options stay on the table. 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝘂𝘁? Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #ShareholderDisputes #CompanyLaw #Founders #CorporateGovernance #USPLaw

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗦𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗸𝗲𝗲𝗽𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 Ask a general counsel in Frankfurt, Mumbai or San Francisco where they would arbitrate an Asian deal, and one answer keeps coming back: Singapore. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦. A judiciary that enforces awards and respects party autonomy. A legislature that updates the International Arbitration Act before problems calcify. Institutions like SIAC that turn procedure into a competitive advantage. And a bench of arbitrators and counsel drawn from every major legal tradition. But the real test of a seat is not the brochure — it is what happens when a party tries to set an award aside. Singapore's courts have drawn that line consistently: intervention where due process genuinely failed, restraint everywhere else. For businesses writing contracts across Asia, that predictability is worth more than any headline. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝘀𝗲𝗮𝘁 — 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗱, 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁? Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #InternationalArbitration #SIAC #Singapore #CrossBorderDisputes #USPLaw

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝗯𝗼𝗱𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗹 𝗶𝘁'𝘀 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲 Most businesses discover their dispute resolution clause the day they need it. That is the worst possible time. Buried at the back of your contract, that clause decides where you fight, under which law, and before whom — court or arbitral tribunal. Get it wrong and you can spend six figures arguing about the forum before anyone touches the merits. Three things to check in every contract you sign this week: ✒️𝘚𝘦𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘭𝘢𝘸 — are they aligned, and do they make commercial sense for where your counterparty's assets are? ✒️𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 — SIAC, ICC, or the courts? A pathological clause naming a non-existent institution is a gift to the party that wants delay. ✒️𝘛𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 — 'negotiate, then mediate, then arbitrate' sounds sensible, but vague tiers become weapons. Each tier needs a clear trigger and time limit. Five minutes at signing can save eighteen months in a jurisdiction fight. When did you last read the dispute resolution clause in your most important contract? Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #DisputeResolution #Arbitration #CommercialContracts #SingaporeLaw #USPLaw

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗜𝗔𝗔 𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀: 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝘄𝗮𝘁𝗰𝗵 Much of the recent attention in Singapore's arbitration landscape has focused on the new SIAC Rules 2025 and the ICC Rules effective June 2026. But there is another reform working through the system that deserves close attention: the amendments to 𝗦𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗰𝘁 𝟭𝟵𝟵𝟰, which are currently working through the legislative process. The IAA is the foundational statute governing international arbitrations seated in Singapore. It gives the courts their supervisory role, provides for interim measures, determines how awards can be challenged and enforced, and incorporates the UNCITRAL Model Law. Any amendment to it has systemic implications for how Singapore-seated arbitrations work in practice. Singapore is not alone in this reform cycle. Across the Asia-Pacific region, PRC amendments to the Arbitration Law took effect in March 2026, Hong Kong has established a working group to review its Arbitration Ordinance, and new institutional rules have been introduced by KCAB in South Korea and AIAC in Malaysia. The entire regional arbitration architecture is being updated simultaneously — and parties whose contracts were drafted years ago may find their dispute resolution provisions interacting with a significantly changed legal landscape. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗿𝗻. 𝗜𝘁 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗱𝗿𝗮𝗳𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀, 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗔 𝗦𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗲-𝘀𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘁𝗲. At USP Law LLC, staying current with these legislative and institutional developments is not optional — it is core to the advice we give. Our clients benefit from counsel who are tracking these reforms in real time, not reading about them after the fact. Watch this space. The IAA reform, when it comes, will matter. Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #InternationalArbitration #Singapore #IAA #SIAC #LegalReform #USPLaw #DisputeResolution #AsiaLaw

𝗠𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹𝗸𝗶𝘁 When people think about resolving a major commercial dispute, they typically think of arbitration or litigation. Mediation is often treated as an afterthought — something tried briefly before the "real" proceedings begin. That is changing. And the numbers show it. For businesses facing a dispute with a counterparty in Asia, this matters practically. A well-run mediation — particularly where the relationship has commercial value worth preserving — can resolve in days what arbitration or litigation may take years to determine. It preserves confidentiality, keeps control in the hands of the parties, and increasingly offers cross-border enforceability through the Singapore Convention framework. The growing list of ratifying states — including Brazil in 2025 and Colombia in 2026 — reflects a broader shift. Mediation is no longer merely an alternative to litigation and arbitration. It is rapidly becoming a mainstream tool in international dispute resolution. At USP Law LLC we believe effective dispute resolution requires both strategic judgment and flexibility. Our Of Counsel, Joseph Tan, is an IMI Certified Mediation Advocate and SIMI Accredited Mediator, combining mediation expertise with substantial experience in commercial disputes and shareholder litigation. At USP Law LLC, we advise clients across the full spectrum of dispute resolution — from mediation and negotiated settlements to arbitration and litigation. The objective is not simply to win the dispute. It is to achieve the outcome that best serves the client's commercial interests. #Mediation #SingaporeConvention #DisputeResolution #CommercialMediation #ADR #Singapore #CrossBorderDisputes #USPLawLLC

I've been working in the legal industry for almost a decade as a paralegal / legal executive before I was admitted to the #Singapore bar. I have almost always worked in boutique-sized firms primarily handling #DisputeResolution. Working in these firms has shown me that boutique firms aren't just "smaller versions" of the big players. Instead, boutique firms are agile, client-focused, and built on relationships rather than bureaucracy. I have seen firsthand: 🎯Clients receive personalized attention instead of being another case file. 🎯Teams operate with flexibility, adapting quickly to client needs. 🎯Lawyers and team members build deeper trust and stronger bonds, because every matter truly matters. For me, #BoutiqueLaw firms embody the best of the profession: excellence without excess, precision without pretense. That’s why I’ve always chosen them—and why I believe they’re better.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵-𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗲𝘀 There is a common assumption in the market that for a high-stakes dispute, you need a large firm. More lawyers. More resources. More floors of a glass building. We respectfully disagree. In dispute resolution — especially complex cross-border arbitration — what matters is not size. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘺𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦. At large firms, a major dispute is one of many. A senior partner wins the work, and the day-to-day conduct is delegated down. Clients pay premium rates for junior hands, while the senior counsel whose name and reputation won the instruction appears sparingly — at key hearings, at client dinners, at billing time. At USP Law LLC , that is not how we operate. We are deliberately lean and deliberately senior. Our clients get direct, consistent access to counsel with decades of experience in commercial litigation and international arbitration — counsel ranked by Benchmark Litigation Asia-Pacific, The Legal 500, and Global Arbitration Review, with experience before SIAC, ICC, HKIAC, AIAC, AAA, and in courts across the region. This matters enormously in arbitration, where strategy is everything. The right argument, the right framing, the right tone with a tribunal can make or break an outcome. These are not things you want delegated. The international arbitration landscape is also evolving fast in 2026. Amendments to the Singapore International Arbitration Act are working through the legislative process, China's revised Arbitration Law took effect in March 2026, and the 2026 ICC Arbitration Rules took effect on 1 June 2026. Staying genuinely current — not just sending clients a newsletter — requires practitioners who are living and breathing this work every day. That is what we do. If you are facing a significant commercial dispute and want to talk about whether USP Law LLC is the right fit for your matter, we would welcome the conversation. Ushan Premaratne | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong #USPLaw #Singapore #Boutiquelaw #InternationalArbitration #CommercialDisputes #DisputeResolution #SeaonsedCounsel #SIAC https://lnkd.in/gi7chS-a

🚀 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗺 𝗷𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗮 𝗵𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗻? Over the past few months, the team at USP Law participated in the 𝗛𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗕𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲. The judging took place on 6 July 2026 at the Supreme Court Auditorium, with Justice Aidan Xu attending as Guest of Honour. The challenge we chose was a question many lawyers are already grappling with: 𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘈𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺? Our proposed solution was a simple one in concept: a programme that automatically redacts sensitive information before any prompt reaches an AI model, and then restores the relevant context afterwards. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗮𝘄𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗳𝗶𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗔𝗜 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀. Whether or not our idea ultimately wins any prizes is almost beside the point. The real value was the opportunity to step back and critically examine our own workflows. The process forced us to rethink: ✒️how lawyers work,  ✒️where technology genuinely adds value,  ✒️where risks arise, and  ✒️how client service can be improved through thoughtful adoption. One of the lessons we took away is that AI adoption in legal practice is no longer a question of 𝘪𝘧, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘰𝘸. The challenge is ensuring that efficiency gains never come at the expense of trust and professional responsibility. Most importantly, the exercise reinforced something that sits at the heart of USP Law's approach: we are a law firm first, but we are constantly looking for better ways to serve our clients through process improvement, technology and innovation. And if the judges were not convinced, perhaps one of our VC or PE clients might be. After all, every startup pitch deck begins with someone saying, "Hear me out..." 😄 Thank you for team USP Law LLC who contributed ideas, challenged assumptions and helped bring the concept to life. Ushan Premaratne | Priscilla Gopalan | Joseph Tan | Edward Ong | Sofea Aziz #USPLaw #LegalInnovation #LegalTech #ArtificialIntelligence #SingaporeLaw #LawFirmInnovation #FutureOfLaw #HackathonForABetterWorld