DOCSLIB.ORG

The One Judiciary Annual Report 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CHIEF JUSTICE’S FOREWORD As I have said on previous occasions, the Judiciary The Courts have also launched several initiatives is the custodian of the sacred trust to uphold to help members of the public better navigate our the rule of law. To this end, it must not only hand judicial system. In October 2018, the State Courts, down judgments which are fair and well-reasoned, together with community partners, launched the but also ensure that justice is accessible to all, first part of a Witness Orientation Toolkit to help for it is only by so doing that it can command the prepare vulnerable witnesses for their attendance trust, respect and confidence of the public. This in court. Similarly, the Family Justice Courts worked is indispensable to the proper administration of closely with the Family Bar to publish, earlier this justice. January, the second edition of The Art of Family Lawyering, which is an e-book that hopes to This One Judiciary Annual Report will provide an encourage family lawyers to conduct proceedings overview of the work done by the Supreme Court, in a manner that reduces acrimony between the the State Courts and the Family Justice Courts in parties, focuses on the best interests of the child, 2018 to enhance our justice system to ensure that it and conduces towards the search for meaningful continues to serve the needs of our people. long-term solutions for families. On the international front, we continued to expand our international networks. Regionally, we Strengthening Our Justice System Both the international legal infrastructure to promote law schools and to expand the opportunities that deepened our engagement with ASEAN by playing Within and Without cross-border investment and trade. students have for clinical training. One example host to a series of events involving the ASEAN of this is the ongoing collaboration between the On the domestic front, we have made steady legal community and will continue our outreach as Family Justice Courts and the Singapore University progress on reforms to our family, civil and criminal I see through the rest of my term as President of of Social Sciences School of Law to develop the justice systems. In the area of family justice, the the ASEAN Law Association. Beyond ASEAN, we The Road Ahead law school’s curriculum and the design of its Legal inter-agency Committee to Review and Enhance also reaffirmed our warm relationships with other As I announced in my Response at the Opening Clerkship Programme under which final year Reforms in the Family Justice System has been judiciaries and international groupings of judges. of the 2019 Legal Year, the legal landscape is students are given opportunities to observe court studying ways of strengthening our family justice Notably, at the second Singapore-China Legal and being dramatically re-shaped by the forces of hearings and processes. framework through the incorporation of therapeutic Judicial Roundtable that was held in August 2018, globalisation, technology, and commercialisation. and restorative principles and it will be putting the Supreme Court established a working group The Judiciary is not insulated from these forces, And yet, education does not only end in law school, forward a set of recommendations that include to develop further areas of possible cooperation and it will work with the legal profession to face the which is why professional training and continuing measures to simplify the enforcement of child and signed a memorandum of guidance on the new challenges. In 2018, we focused on two key legal education is critical. One important initiative access orders and a proposed certification and recognition and enforcement of money judgments areas: (a) legal education and professional training, in the area of legal education, which will be of accreditation scheme for family law practitioners. in commercial cases. And in October 2018, judges and (b) transformation and innovation. particular interest to the Judiciary, is the Master of In the areas of civil and criminal justice, the from the Supreme Court joined their counterparts Laws in Judicial Studies programme, an advanced recommendations of the Civil Justice Commission, from more than 30 other jurisdictions at the programme to be jointly offered by the Singapore and the reforms introduced by the Criminal Justice second meeting of the Standing International Legal Education and Professional Training Judicial College and Singapore Management Reform Act 2018, promise to transform our present Forum of Commercial Courts (SIFoCC) in New On legal education, it is imperative that our law University. It is targeted at serving judges and system of civil and criminal justice by modernising York to exchange experiences and best practices schools continue to produce graduates who are judicial aspirants and offers a comprehensive and procedures, simplifying archaic provisions, and in the resolution of commercial disputes. We are equipped with the skills that will enable them diverse programme that will address both the facilitating the efficient disposal of cases. honoured to host the next SIFoCC meeting in 2020, to meet the evolving needs of our society and theoretical and practical aspects of judging. and look forward to welcoming our colleagues the challenges of modern legal practice. For this from around the world to continue this important reason, we continue to engage with a variety of key dialogue on how we can collaborate to strengthen stakeholders to strengthen the curriculum in our CHIEF JUSTICE’S FOREWORD Technology We are also looking at ways of harnessing The Judiciary has long led the way in embracing technology to enhance the efficiency of physical transformation and innovation in the area hearings. For example, the use of automated of technology, and it will continue to do so, voice transcription systems supported by artificial particularly where this will allow increased intelligence can significantly reduce the cost of access to justice. It is for this reason that we have obtaining real-time transcription for open court developed several technology-enabled self-help trials. In this regard, the State Courts have been solutions for litigants. collaborating with A*STAR’s Institute for Infocomm Research to develop an automated speech One such notable initiative is the Community transcription system and, earlier this March, this Justice and Tribunals System (CJTS), an online system was deployed on a pilot basis in the State filing and case management system with dispute Courts, with further deployment in the Family resolution capabilities, that the State Courts first Justice Courts and the High Court planned in due launched in the Small Claims Tribunals in July 2017. course. Since then, the CJTS has been rolled out in phases to cover several other kinds of claims: in February Closing 2018, it was implemented in the Community Much has been accomplished in the past year, but Disputes Resolution Tribunals to allow the much work remains to be done. I have no doubt electronic filing of neighbour dispute claims as well that, working together, the Singapore Judiciary as to facilitate the early settlement of such disputes will continue to discharge its duty of ensuring that through an online dispute resolution module, justice is dispensed without fear or favour, affection and earlier this January, it was made available in or ill-will, and that it remains within the reach of all the Employment Claims Tribunals to allow for the in our nation. online filing of employment claims. In similar vein, we are also aiming to launch an online dispute resolution platform for motor accident claims over the course of this year. The platform is expected to feature an outcome simulator as well as a facility for parties to negotiate a settlement online without having to come to court. The Family Justice Courts are also exploring the use of this system to resolve disputes Sundaresh Menon over child maintenance claims. Chief Justice Supreme Court of Singapore THE JUDICIARY OF SINGAPORE AT A GLANCE The Judiciary is made up of the Supreme Court, State Courts and The Judiciary is one of the three Organs of State, together with the Executive and the Legislature. the Family Justice Courts. The Honourable the Chief Justice is the head of the Judiciary, who also oversees the Supreme Court. JUDICIARY EXECUTIVE LEGISLATURE interprets the laws and is a system or the Government, includes the comprises the President and of courts that upholds the law and Elected President, the Cabinet and Parliament and is the legislative ensures justice is accessible to all. the Attorney-General, and exercises authority responsible for powers according to the law. enacting legislation. CHIEF JUSTICE PRESIDING JUDGE PRESIDING JUDGE The Supreme Court Bench consists of the Chief Justice, Judges of The State Courts are headed by the Presiding Judge of the State Courts, who is The Family Justice Courts are headed by the Presiding Judge of the Family Appeal, Judges, Senior Judges, International Judges and Judicial assisted by the Deputy Presiding Judge, who concurrently holds the position of Justice Courts, and consist of Judges of the High Court (Family Division), Commissioners. The Supreme Court Registry is headed by the Registrar, Registrar of the State Courts. District Judges and Magistrates preside over the District including Judicial Officers holding the appointment of District Judges and who is assisted by the Deputy Registrar, Senior Assistant Registrars and Courts and Magistrates’ Courts respectively, and may hold concurrent appointments Magistrates, and may concurrently be appointed as Assistant Registrars, Assistant Registrars who perform judicial functions. as Deputy Registrars, Coroners, Referees, Tribunal Judges and Magistrates. together with Court Family Specialists and Court Administrators. DISTRICT COURTS HIGH COURT (FAMILY DIVISION) • Hear civil cases where the value of the claim is between $60,000 and • Exercises original jurisdiction and hears appeals against $250,000, or up to $500,000 for road traffic accident claims or claims for the decisions of the Family Courts and the Youth Courts in personal injuries arising out of industrial accidents.
Recommended publications
  • The Rule of Law and Urban Development

    The Rule of Law and Urban Development

    The Rule of Law and Urban Development The transformation of Singapore from a struggling, poor country into one of the most affluent nations in the world—within a single generation—has often been touted as an “economic miracle”. The vision and pragmatism shown by its leaders has been key, as has its STUDIES URBAN SYSTEMS notable political stability. What has been less celebrated, however, while being no less critical to Singapore’s urban development, is the country’s application of the rule of law. The rule of law has been fundamental to Singapore’s success. The Rule of Law and Urban Development gives an overview of the role played by the rule of law in Singapore’s urban development over the past 54 years since independence. It covers the key principles that characterise Singapore’s application of the rule of law, and reveals deep insights from several of the country’s eminent urban pioneers, leaders and experts. It also looks at what ongoing and future The Rule of Law and Urban Development The Rule of Law developments may mean for the rule of law in Singapore. The Rule of Law “ Singapore is a nation which is based wholly on the Rule of Law. It is clear and practical laws and the effective observance and enforcement and Urban Development of these laws which provide the foundation for our economic and social development. It is the certainty which an environment based on the Rule of Law generates which gives our people, as well as many MNCs and other foreign investors, the confidence to invest in our physical, industrial as well as social infrastructure.
  • Advancing Justice: Expanding the Possibilities State Courts | Annual Report 2017 One Judiciary

    Advancing Justice: Expanding the Possibilities State Courts | Annual Report 2017 One Judiciary

    ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES STATE COURTS | ANNUAL REPORT 2017 ONE JUDICIARY ANNUAL REPORT 2017 SHARED VISION Inspiring public trust and confidence through an effective and accessible justice system MISSION Serving society with quality judgments, timely dispute resolution and excellent court services CORE VALUES Fairness Accessibility Independence, Integrity, Impartiality Responsiveness CONTENTS Foreword by The Honourable the Chief Justice 6 Message from the Presiding Judge 8 Organisation Chart 10 ADVANCING JUSTICE: EXPANDING THE POSSIBILITIES 11 Workplan 2017 Initiatives 12 ICMS for Accused Persons 13 Victim Assistance Scheme 13 Guidebook for Accused-in-Person 14 Updated Publications on Personal Injury and Fatal or Motor Accident Cases 14 Employment Claims Tribunals 15 Community Justice and Tribunals System & Short Mediation and Hearing 15 On-site Psychological Services 16 Family-connect @ State Courts 16 State Courts-NUS Clerkship Programme 17 Executive Leadership Programme for Court and Tribunal Administrators 18 IFCE: State Courts of Singapore Model 18 A Day in Court 19 Public Talk on Resolving Employment Disputes 19 Sentencing Conference 2017 20 State Courts Towers Progress 21 INSPIRING PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE 23 Dashboard 24 Caseload Profile 25 Significant Cases: Criminal Justice Division 27 Significant Cases: Civil Justice Division 28 Significant Cases: Community Justice and Tribunals Division 29 Significant Cases: State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution 30 Organisational Excellence 31 Service Excellence 32 Results of State Courts Surveys 33 Local Awards and International Profile 34 Visits by Distinguished Guests 36 OUR PEOPLE 37 Nurturing Our People 39 Staff Engagement: State Courts Conversation 2020 40 Our People: 2017 41 OUR VOLUNTEERS 42 Working Hand-in-Hand 43 GIVING BACK TO SOCIETY 44 Giving Back to Society 45 ANNUAL REPORT 2017 6 STATE COURTS, SINGAPORE 2017 was a significant year for the Courts as we took FOREWORD steps to respond to global trends in technology and globalisation.
  • The Development of Singapore Law: a Bicentennial Retrospective1

    The Development of Singapore Law: a Bicentennial Retrospective1

    (2020) 32 SAcLJ 804 (Published on e-First 8 May 2020) THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGAPORE LAW: A BICENTENNIAL RETROSPECTIVE1 The present article reviews (in broad brushstrokes) the status of Singapore law during its bicentennial year. It is not only about origins but also about growth – in particular, the autochthonous or indigenous growth of the Singapore legal system (particularly since the independence of Singapore as a nation state on 9 August 1965). The analysis of this growth is divided into quantitative as well as qualitative parts. In particular, the former constitutes an empirical analysis which attempts – for the very first time − to tell the development of Singapore law through numbers, building on emerging techniques in data visualisation and empirical legal studies. Andrew PHANG Judge of Appeal, Supreme Court of Singapore. GOH Yihan Professor of Law, School of Law, Singapore Management University. Jerrold SOH Assistant Professor of Law, School of Law, Singapore Management University; Co-Founder, Lex Quanta. I. Introduction 1 The present article, which reviews (in broad brushstrokes) the status of Singapore law during its bicentennial year since the founding of Singapore by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819, is of particular significance as English law constitutes the foundation of Singapore law. The role of Raffles and his successors, therefore, could not have been more directly 1 All views expressed in the present article are personal views only and do not reflect in any way the views of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the Singapore Management University or Lex Quanta. Although this article ought, ideally, to have been published last year, the immense amount of case law that had to be analysed has led to a slight delay.
  • Contract Law Chee Ho THAM Singapore Management University, Chtham@Smu.Edu.Sg

    Contract Law Chee Ho THAM Singapore Management University, [email protected]

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 2007 Contract law Chee Ho THAM Singapore Management University, [email protected] Pearlie KOH Singapore Management University, [email protected] Pey Woan LEE Singapore Management University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research Part of the Asian Studies Commons, and the Contracts Commons Citation THAM, Chee Ho; KOH, Pearlie; and LEE, Pey Woan. Contract law. (2007). Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Singapore Cases. 8, 150-195. Research Collection School Of Law. Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/347 This Journal Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Collection School Of Law by an authorized administrator of Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. For more information, please email [email protected]. 150 SAL Annual Review (2007) 8 SAL Ann Rev 10. CONTRACT LAW Pearlie KOH LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (University of Melbourne); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Associate Professor, Singapore Management University, School of Law. THAM Chee Ho LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), BCL (Oxford); Solicitor (England and Wales), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore), Attorney and Counsellor-at-Law (New York State); Associate Professor, Singapore Management University, School of Law.
  • Bench & Bar Games 2007

    Bench & Bar Games 2007

    South China Sea MALAYSIA SINGAPORE MALAYSIA | SINGAPORE Bench & Bar Games 2007 28 - 30 April 2007 Java Sea OFFICES SINGAPORE 80 RAFFLES PLACE #33-00 UOB PLAZA 1 SINGAPORE 048624 TEL: +65 6225 2626 FAX: +65 6225 1838 SHANGHAI UNIT 23-09 OCEAN TOWERS NO. 550 YAN AN EAST ROAD SHANGHAI 200001, CHINA TEL: +86 (21) 6322 9191 FAX: +86 (21) 6322 4550 EMAIL [email protected] CONTACT PERSON HELEN YEO, MANAGING PARTNER YEAR ESTABLISHED 1861 NUMBER OF LAWYERS 95 KEY PRACTICE AREAS CORPORATE FINANCE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & TECHNOLOGY LITIGATION & ARBITRATION REAL ESTATE LANGUAGES SPOKEN ENGLISH, MANDARIN, MALAY, TAMIL www.rodyk.com 1 Contents Message from The Honourable The Chief 2 10 Council Members of Bar Council Malaysia Justice, Singapore 2007/2008 Message from The Honourable Chief 3 15 Sports Committee - Singapore and Malaysia Justice, Malaysia Message from the President of The Law 4 16 Teams Society of Singapore Message from the President of Bar Council 5 Malaysia 22 Results of Past Games 1969 to 2006 Message from Chairman, Sports 6 Sports Suit No. 1 of 1969 Committee, The Law Society of Singapore 23 Message from Chairman, Sports 7 Acknowledgements Committee, Bar Council Malaysia 24 9 The Council of The Law Society of Singapore 2007 Malaysia | Singapore Bench & Bar Games 2007 022 Message from The Honourable The Chief Justice, Singapore The time of the year has arrived once again for the Malaysia/Singapore Bench & Bar Games. Last year we enjoyed the warm hospitality of our Malaysian hosts on the magical island of Langkawi and this year, we will do all that we can to reciprocate.
  • Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon

    Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon

    RESPONSE BY CHIEF JUSTICE SUNDARESH MENON OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2018 Monday, 8 January 2018 Mr Attorney, Mr Vijayendran, Members of the Bar, Honoured Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen: I. Introduction 1. It is my pleasure, on behalf of the Judiciary, to welcome you all to the Opening of this Legal Year. I particularly wish to thank the Honourable Chief Justice Prof Dr M Hatta Ali and Justice Takdir Rahmadi of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, the Right Honourable Tun Md Raus Sharif, Chief Justice of Malaysia, and our other guests from abroad, who have made the effort to travel here to be with us this morning. II. Felicitations 2. 2017 was a year when we consolidated the ongoing development of the Supreme Court Bench, and I shall begin my response with a brief recap of the major changes, most of which have been alluded to. 1 A. Court of Appeal 3. Justice Steven Chong was appointed as a Judge of Appeal on 1 April 2017. This was in anticipation of Justice Chao Hick Tin’s retirement on 27 September 2017, after five illustrious decades in the public service. In the same context, Justice Andrew Phang was appointed Vice-President of the Court of Appeal. While we will feel the void left by Justice Chao’s retirement, I am heartened that we have in place a strong team of judges to lead us forward; and delighted that Justice Chao will continue contributing to the work of the Supreme Court, following his appointment, a few days ago, as a Senior Judge.
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. 11 January 2021 May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Justices of the Court of Appeal, Judges of the Appellate Division, Judges and Judicial Commissioners, Introduction 1. The past year has been an extremely trying one for the country, and no less for my Chambers. It has been a real test of our fortitude, our commitment to defend and advance Singapore’s interests, and our ability to adapt to unforeseen difficulties brought about by the COVID-19 virus. I am very proud of the good work my Chambers has done over the past year, which I will share with you in the course of my speech. I also acknowledge that the past year has shown that we have some room to grow and improve. I will outline the measures we have undertaken as an institution to address issues which we faced and ensure that we meet the highest standards of excellence, fairness and integrity in the years to come. 2. My speech this morning is in three parts. First, I will talk about the critical legal support which we provided to the Government throughout the COVID-19 crisis. Second, I will discuss some initiatives we have embarked on to future-proof the organisation and to deal with the challenges which we faced this past year, including digitalisation and workforce changes. Finally, I will share my reflections about the role we play in the criminal justice system and what I consider to be our grave and solemn duty as prosecutors.
  • Contract Law 162

    Contract Law 162

    (2004) 5 SAL Ann Rev Contract Law 162 9. CONTRACT LAW Pearlie KOH LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (Melbourne); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Associate Professor, Singapore Management University, Department of Law. THAM Chee Ho LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), BCL (Oxford) Solicitor (England and Wales), Attorney and Counsellor-at-Law (New York State), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Professor, Singapore Management University, Department of Law. LEE Pey Woan LLB (Hons) (London), BCL (Oxford) Barrister (Middle Temple), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Professor, Singapore Management University, Department of Law. Introduction 9.1 As with past volumes, the task of selecting cases for review in this section was immense. Given the extremely large number of decisions which touched on contract law, it would not be feasible to comprehensively discuss all of them. Therefore, in general, decisions focusing on specialist areas of contract have not been discussed in this section as they will be better dealt with in the appropriate section elsewhere in this Annual Review. In consequence, the bulk of the cases discussed herein have been selected on the basis that they address contractual issues which are of general interest and application. Formation Intention to create legal relations 9.2 The trite principle that the intention to create a binding contract is determined objectively was repeatedly affirmed in numerous decisions (see, for instance, Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR 502, Compaq Computer Asia Pte Ltd v Computer Interface (S) Pte Ltd [2004] 3 SLR 316, Chia Ee Lin Evelyn v Teh Guek Ngor Engelin [2004] 4 SLR 330 (which has been affirmed on appeal – see Teh Guek Ngor Engelin née Tan v Chia Ee Lin Evelyn [2005] 3 SLR 22), and Midlink Development Pte Ltd v The Stansfield Group Pte Ltd [2004] 4 SLR 258).
  • Paginator.Book([2006] 2 SLR(R) 0690.Fm)

    Paginator.Book([2006] 2 SLR(R) 0690.Fm)

    paginator.book Page 690 Monday, November 23, 2009 3:54 PM 690 SINGAPORE LAW REPORTS (REISSUE) [2006] 2 SLR(R) The Polo/Lauren Co, LP v Shop In Department Store Pte Ltd [2006] SGCA 14 Court of Appeal — Civil Appeal No 67 of 2005 Yong Pung How CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA and Tan Lee Meng J 21 February; 31 March; 6 April 2006 Trade Marks and Trade Names — Infringement — Appellant alleging respondent’s sign infringing appellant’s registered word mark — Applicable test for infringement under s 27(2)(b) Trade Marks Act — Whether respondent’s sign similar to appellant’s word mark — Whether goods to which defendant’s sign and plaintiff's mark applying similar — Whether likelihood of confusion on the part of the public existing — Section 27(2)(b) Trade Marks Act (Cap 332, 1999 Rev Ed) Facts The appellant was the registered proprietor of six trade marks including the “POLO” word mark (“the word mark”). The respondent operated five suburban stores that sold items such as clothing, bags, handbags, shoes, watches and household stuff at prices affordable to the masses. The respondent had applied to the Registry of Trade Marks to have the sign “POLO PACIFIC” (“the sign”) in the same class as the word mark. This application was accepted by the Registry for publication, although it was pending opposition by the appellant. In the meantime, the respondent had started to sell goods bearing the sign. The appellant considered this to be a breach of its rights under the word mark and commenced suit, alleging that the respondent had breached s 27(2) of the Trade Marks Act (Cap 332, 1999 Rev Ed) as well as a prior undertaking not to infringe the appellant’s marks.
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. Monday, 7 January 2019 Supreme Court Building, Level Basement 2, Auditorium May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Judges of Appeal, Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court, Introduction: AGC in Support of the Government, for the People 1 2018 was a fast-paced year for the Government and for the Attorney-General’s Chambers. The issues occupying the thoughts of Singapore’s leaders were complex and varied, with several key themes coming to the fore. These themes shaped our work over the past year, as we strove to be a strategic partner in support of the Government’s plans and initiatives, for the benefit of our country and its citizens. I will touch on three of these themes. 2 The first theme was our Smart Nation. This initiative aims to tap on the ongoing digital revolution in order to transform Singapore through technology. The Smart Nation vision is for Singapore to be a world-class leader in the field of digital innovation, resting on the triple pillars of a digital economy, digital government, and digital society. The Smart Nation revolution will play a critical part in ensuring our continued competitiveness on the world stage, powered by digital innovation. 1 3 Data sharing was and continues to be a critical aspect of this initiative. To this end, a new law was passed in 2018 which introduced a data sharing regime among different agencies in the Singapore Government. The Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018, which was drafted by our Chambers in support of this initiative, underpins and formalises a data sharing framework for the Singapore public sector.
  • Valedictory Reference in Honour of Justice Chao Hick Tin 27 September 2017 Address by the Honourable the Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon

    Valedictory Reference in Honour of Justice Chao Hick Tin 27 September 2017 Address by the Honourable the Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon

    VALEDICTORY REFERENCE IN HONOUR OF JUSTICE CHAO HICK TIN 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SUNDARESH MENON -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon Deputy Prime Minister Teo, Minister Shanmugam, Prof Jayakumar, Mr Attorney, Mr Vijayendran, Mr Hoong, Ladies and Gentlemen, 1. Welcome to this Valedictory Reference for Justice Chao Hick Tin. The Reference is a formal sitting of the full bench of the Supreme Court to mark an event of special significance. In Singapore, it is customarily done to welcome a new Chief Justice. For many years we have not observed the tradition of having a Reference to salute a colleague leaving the Bench. Indeed, the last such Reference I can recall was the one for Chief Justice Wee Chong Jin, which happened on this very day, the 27th day of September, exactly 27 years ago. In that sense, this is an unusual event and hence I thought I would begin the proceedings by saying something about why we thought it would be appropriate to convene a Reference on this occasion. The answer begins with the unique character of the man we have gathered to honour. 1 2. Much can and will be said about this in the course of the next hour or so, but I would like to narrate a story that took place a little over a year ago. It was on the occasion of the annual dinner between members of the Judiciary and the Forum of Senior Counsel. Mr Chelva Rajah SC was seated next to me and we were discussing the recently established Judicial College and its aspiration to provide, among other things, induction and continuing training for Judges.
  • Chief Justice's Foreword

    Chief Justice's Foreword

    CHIEF JUSTICE’S FOREWORD As I have said on previous occasions, the Judiciary together with community partners, launched the is the custodian of the sacred trust to uphold first part of a Witness Orientation Toolkit to help the rule of law. To this end, it must not only hand prepare vulnerable witnesses for their attendance down judgments which are fair and well-reasoned, in court. Similarly, the Family Justice Courts worked but also ensure that justice is accessible to all, closely with the Family Bar to publish, earlier this for it is only by so doing that it can command the January, the second edition of The Art of Family trust, respect and confidence of the public. This Lawyering, which is an e-book that hopes to is indispensable to the proper administration of encourage family lawyers to conduct proceedings justice. in a manner that reduces acrimony between the parties, focuses on the best interests of the child, This One Judiciary Annual Report will provide an and conduces towards the search for meaningful overview of the work done by the Supreme Court, long-term solutions for families. the State Courts and the Family Justice Courts in 2018 to enhance our justice system to ensure that it On the international front, we continued to continues to serve the needs of our people. expand our international networks. Regionally, we deepened our engagement with ASEAN by playing host to a series of events involving the ASEAN legal community and will continue our outreach as Strengthening Our Justice System Both of Social Sciences School of Law to develop the I see through the rest of my term as President of The Road Ahead Within and Without law school’s curriculum and the design of its Legal the ASEAN Law Association.