DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Bulletin a Summary of Developments in the Law at a Glance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legal Bulletin a Summary of Developments in the Law at a Glance Legal Bulletin A summary of developments in the law At a glance Banking Singapore High Court considers scope of conclusive 6 evidence clause in banking documentation Corporate MOF and ACRA invite comments on wide-ranging changes to 11 Companies Act and revised regulatory framework for foreign entities SGX issues guide on sustainability reporting for listed 13 companies Dispute Resolution Singapore Court of Appeal elaborates on relationship 16 between insolvency and arbitration in upholding High Court decision Intellectual Property & Technology Singapore High Court dismisses application by a nightclub 19 operating at Marina Bay Sands to strike out trade mark action by Bali restaurant and bar Ku De Ta Media & Telecommunications Mandatory cross-carriage obligations to take effect on 23 1 August 2011 Tax IRAS issues e-Tax Guide on “Income Tax & Stamp Duty: 25 Mergers and Acquisitions Scheme” News Allen & Gledhill New Partners 2011 33 Allen & Gledhill wins Who’s Who Legal Country Award 2011 34 for Singapore Click here for Table of Contents Vol 23 No 7 July 2011 ALLEN & GLEDHILL LLP In this issue Articles Banking MAS revises MAS Notice 632 and responds to feedback on 4 Consultation Paper on Rules on Residential Property Loans: Mortgage equity withdrawal loans and aggregation of loans from moneylenders Singapore High Court considers scope of conclusive evidence 6 clause in banking documentation Competition CCS issues clearance decision relating to joint venture 10 agreement between three airline companies on air transportation of passengers Corporate MOF and ACRA invite comments on wide-ranging changes to 11 Companies Act and revised regulatory framework for foreign entities SGX issues guide on sustainability reporting for listed companies 13 Continuous all day trading on SGX securities market from 13 1 August 2011 Editorial Team Margaret Chew Singapore High Court judge considers right of access to company 14 documents in the context of a derivative action Elizabeth Wong Soo Seong Theng Dispute Resolution Hong Farn Ling Anitha Rajaram Singapore Court of Appeal elaborates on relationship between 16 insolvency and arbitration in upholding High Court decision Insurance The contents of the Legal Bulletin are intended to provide general information. Although we MAS issues consultation paper on “Proposed Revisions to the 17 endeavour to ensure that the Risk Based Capital Framework - Financial Resources Adjustment, information contained herein is Reinsurance Adjustment, C2 Risk Requirements” accurate, we do not warrant its accuracy or completeness or accept any liability for any loss Intellectual Property & Technology or damage arising from any reliance thereon. The information in JPO and IPOS extend Pilot Patent Prosecution Highway for 18 this Legal Bulletin should not another year till 1 July 2012 be treated as a substitute for specific legal advice concerning particular situations. If you IPOS launches IP Competency Framework and ideas2IP 18 would like to discuss the implications of these legal developments on your business Singapore High Court dismisses application by a nightclub 19 or obtain advice, please do not operating at Marina Bay Sands to strike out trade mark action by hesitate to approach your usual Bali restaurant and bar Ku De Ta contact at Allen & Gledhill LLP or the editors of the Legal Bulletin, Margaret Chew (+65 6890 7500 or margaret.chew@allenandgledhill .com) and Elizabeth Wong (+65 6890 7559 or elizabeth.wong @allenandgledhill.com). Legal Bulletin July 2011 2 Media & Telecommunications Mandatory cross-carriage obligations to take effect on 1 August 23 2011 SGNIC launches Internationalised Domain Names with effect from 24 4 July 2011 Real Estate MAS consults on proposed residential property loans fact sheet 25 Tax IRAS issues e-Tax Guide on “Income Tax & Stamp Duty: Mergers 25 and Acquisitions Scheme” MOF consults on draft Income Tax (Amendment) Bill 2011: 26 Implementing Budget 2011 changes MOF consults on draft Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill 29 2011: Implementing Budget 2011 changes General MAS issues regulations providing for sanctions and freezing of 30 assets in relation to Libya Accounting Standards Council issues accounting standard and 31 financial reporting framework for charities News Acquisition of Allgreen Properties Limited 31 Silver Oak Ltd.’s Series 002 Commercial Mortgage-Backed Notes 32 Equity Fund Raising by Olam International Limited 32 Issue of A$500 million Senior Unsecured Floating Rate Notes due 32 2014 under the US$5 billion Programme for Issuance of Debt Instruments of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited Acquisition of Hsu Fu Chi International Limited 33 S$2.16 billion revolving credit facility to SingTel Group Treasury 33 Pte. Ltd. Allen & Gledhill New Partners 2011 33 Allen & Gledhill wins Who’s Who Legal Country Award 2011 for 34 Singapore Allen & Gledhill LLP also publishes the monthly Financial Services Bulletin. To view the July 2011 issue, please click here. Legal Bulletin July 2011 3 Articles Banking MAS revises MAS Notice 632 and responds to feedback on Consultation Paper on Rules on Residential Property Loans: Mortgage equity withdrawal loans and aggregation of loans from moneylenders From 13 January 2011 to 14 February 2011, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (the “MAS”) sought comments on the proposals in its consultation paper entitled “Rules on Residential Property Loans” (the “Consultation Paper”). Primarily, the MAS proposed a requirement for financial institutions (“FIs”) to comply with regulatory loan-to-value (“LTV”) limits on mortgage equity withdrawal loans (“MWLs”) and to aggregate loans from moneylenders used to pay for residential property purchases, for LTV computation. On 13 July 2011, the MAS issued a revised MAS Notice 632 “Residential Property Loans” (“MAS Notice 632”) and released its response to comments received on the consultation paper. Most notably, the MAS has decided to maintain the status quo for MWLs for non-individuals, that is to say, MWLs to non-individuals will not be subject to a regulatory LTV limit. The MAS will proceed to introduce regulatory LTV limits on MWLs to individuals. The MAS’ response on issues that are of wider interest are highlighted below. Background On 13 January 2011, the MAS, jointly with the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of National Development, announced measures to maintain a stable and sustainable residential property market in Singapore. The measures took effect on 14 January 2011 and included LTV limits of 60% and 50% on housing loans for purchasers who are individuals and non-individuals respectively. In its Consultation Paper, the MAS proposed requiring FIs to comply with regulatory LTV limits on MWLs that are secured on residential property, but not used for the purchase of the residential property. These limits were to be set at the same level as the regulatory LTV limits on housing loans granted for the purchase of residential properties. The MAS had also proposed that, for the purpose of LTV computation, FIs must aggregate the borrower’s loans from moneylenders, if any, which are used to pay for the property purchase. 50% LTV limit on MWLs to non-individuals On account of the following feedback, the MAS will maintain the status quo for MWLs for non-individuals, i.e. MWLs to non-individuals will not be subject to a regulatory LTV limit: the 50% LTV limit on MWLs would limit credit supply to small and medium-sized enterprises (“SMEs”) and increase their cost of borrowing; the operational difficulty of applying the 50% LTV limit as FIs often offer SMEs a package of credit facilities which is secured on a pool of collateral. In such loan structures, FIs do not apply a separate LTV limit on credit facilities secured solely on residential property. Legal Bulletin July 2011 4 However, the MAS expects FIs to continue to exercise prudent credit assessment in granting MWLs to non-individuals and to apply appropriate LTV limits on these MWLs based on their credit assessment. 80%/60% LTV limit on MWLs to individuals The MAS will introduce regulatory LTV limits on MWLs to individuals. Where the borrowers are individuals, a MWL on a residential property, together with the outstanding balance of any credit facilities secured on that property, will be subject to an LTV limit of: 80%, if the borrower has no outstanding credit facility for the purchase of another property; or 60%, if the borrower has any outstanding credit facilities for the purchase of another property. The MAS expects FIs to exercise due diligence and judgment on possible circumvention of these regulatory LTV limits on MWLs to individuals, for example, by individuals setting up vehicles to invest in property. Where “shell companies” are set up by individuals solely to obtain a MWL, FIs should “look through” and apply the 80%/60% LTV limit on MWLs to such “shell companies” as if they were individuals. However, the 80%/60% LTV limit would not apply to companies. Aggregation of loans from moneylenders for computation of LTV Self-declaration: The MAS received suggestions from respondents that FIs be allowed to rely on the borrower’s self-declaration on whether he has borrowed from moneylenders to make the property purchase. The MAS will allow an FI to rely on self-declaration by the borrower on whether he has borrowed from moneylenders or other sources to fund the property purchase. The FI should consider an appropriately-worded self-declaration by the borrower on whether he has borrowed from any other source other than the FI to pay towards the property purchase, and not restrict the content of the self-declaration to borrowing from licensed moneylenders only. Definition of “moneylender”: The MAS received feedback that the proposed legal definition of “moneylender” may be too wide. The proposed definition included “licensed moneylenders”, “excluded moneylenders” and “exempt moneylenders” as defined in the Moneylenders Act. Among the three categories, licensed moneylenders are the most common source of loans for the public. Taking the feedback For further information, please into account, the definition of “moneylender” in MAS Notice 632 now contact: encompasses only licensed moneylenders.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Of the Constitution, the Prime Minister, After Consulting
    Release No.: 26/APR 02-0/91/04/25 APPOINTMENT OF JUDICIAL COMMISSIONERS OF THE SUPREME COURT ) In accordance with article 94 ( 4) of the Constitution, the Prime Minister, after consulting the Chief Justice, has advised the President to appoint Mr Kan Ting Chiu and Miss Lai Siu Chiu as Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court for a period of one year each with effect from 2 May 1991. The appointments are in accordance with the Chief Justice's programme to restructure the Supreme Court Bench, by making short-term appointments of Judicial Commissioners to facilitate the disposal of business in the Supreme Court. Under this programme, it · is also envisaged that Judges will be appointed in future from those who have had experience as Judicial Commissioners. Mr Kan Ting Chiu, 44, graduated from the University of Singapore with·a Bachelor of Laws (Honours) Degree in 1970, and gained a Master of Laws Degree from the National University of Sing&pore in 1988. From 1970 to 1976 he was in the Singapore Legal Service and served as a State Counsel in the Attorney- General's Chambers, and as a Senior Magistrate in the Subordinate Courts. Since 1976 he has been in private practice. He was a Council member .of the Law Society from 1982 to 1984 and is presently a member of the Inquiry Panel under the Legal Profession Act. ) 2 Miss Lai Siu Chiu, 42, was born in Malacca and is the first woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court of Singapore. She will also be the youngest person on the Supreme Court Bench.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract Law Chee Ho THAM Singapore Management University, [email protected]
    Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 7-2012 Contract Law Chee Ho THAM Singapore Management University, [email protected] Pey Woan LEE Singapore Management University, [email protected] Yihan GOH 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; LEE, Pey Woan; and GOH, Yihan. Contract Law. (2012). Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Singapore Cases 2011. 182-226. Research Collection School Of Law. Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/1464 This Case note/Digest 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]. 182 SAL Annual Review (2011) 12 SAL Ann Rev 11. CONTRACT 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, School of Law, Singapore Management University. LEE Pey Woan LLB (Hons) (London), BCL (Oxford); Barrister (Middle Temple), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Associate Professor, School of Law, Singapore Management University. GOH Yihan LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (Harvard); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Professor,Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore.
    [Show full text]
  • Lawlink 2019 Contents Contents
    law link FROM ACADEMIA TO POLITICS AND BACK PROFESSOR S JAYAKUMAR ‘63 CHARTING THE NEXT CHAPTER JUSTICE ANDREW PHANG ‘82 ON LANGUAGE, LAW AND CODING STEPHANIE LAW ‘14 AN EMINENT CAREER EMERITUS PROFESSOR M. SORNARAJAH AI & THE LAW ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR DANIEL SENG ‘92 THE ALUMNI MAGAZINE OF THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE FACULTY OF LAW LAWLINK 2019 CONTENTS CONTENTS 02 04 10 16 22 28 Dean’s Diary Alumni Spotlight Student Features Reunions Benefactors Law School Message from the Dean Professor S Jayakumar ’63: Highlights Congratulations Class of 2019 16 Class of 1989 22 From Academia to Politics and Back 03 Michael Hwang SC Class of 1999 24 An Eminent Career 10 30 Justice Andrew Phang ’82: Emeritus Professor M. Sornarajah Delivers SLR Annual Lecture 17 Charting The Next Chapter 05 Class of 2009 25 NUS Giving The Appeal of the Moot 18 AI & the Law 11 Stephanie Law ’14: LLM Class of 2009 26 Chandran Mohan K Nair ‘76 Associate Professor Daniel Seng ’92 & Susan de Silva ‘83: On Language, Law and Coding 08 Rag & Flag 2019 20 12 Scholarship to expand Kuala Lumpur & New York 27 Key Lectures minsets about success Law Alumni Mentor Programme Law IV: Unjust Enrichment 21 14 2019 09 Book Launches Alumni Relations & Development NUS Law Eu Tong Sen Building 469G Bukit Timah Road Singapore 259776 Tel: (65) 6516 3616 Fax: (65) 6779 0979 Email: [email protected] www.nuslawlink.com www.law.nus.edu.sg/alumni Please update your particulars at: www.law.nus.edu.sg/ alumni_update_particulars.asp 1 LAWLINK 2019 ALUMNI SPOTLIGHT DEAN’S DIARY FROM ACADEMIA TO POLITICS PROFESSOR SIMON CHESTERMAN AND BACK History often makes more sense in retrospect (TRAIL).
    [Show full text]
  • Eighteenth Annual International Maritime Law
    EIGHTEENTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LAW ARBITRATION MOOT 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY TEAM 10 ON BEHALF OF: AGAINST: INFERNO RESOURCES SDN BHD FURNACE TRADING PTE LTD AND IDONCARE BERJAYA UTAMA PTY LTD CLAIMANT RESPONDENTS COUNSEL Margery Harry Declan Haiqiu Ai Godber Noble Zhu TEAM 10 MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................................... III LIST OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................................................ V STATEMENT OF FACTS ................................................................................................................ 1 APPLICABLE LAW ......................................................................................................................... 2 I. SINGAPOREAN LAW APPLIES TO ALL ASPECTS OF THE DISPUTE ............................................... 2 A. Singaporean law governs the procedure of the arbitration ................................................... 2 B. Singaporean law is the substantive law applying to FURNACE and INFERNO’s dispute ....... 2 C. Singaporean law is also the substantive law applying to FURNACE and IDONCARE’s dispute ................................................................................................................................... 3 ARGUMENTS ON THE INTERIM APPLICATION FOR SALE OF CARGO ......................... 4 II. A VALID AND ENFORCEABLE LIEN
    [Show full text]
  • Lord Phillips in Singapore SAL Annual Lecture 2006
    MICA (P) No. 076/05/2006 September — October 2006 interSINGAPOREinterSINGAPORE ACADEMYACADEMY seseOFOF LAWLAW SALSAL AnnualAnnual LectureLecture 2006:2006: LordLord PhillipsPhillips inin SingaporeSingapore ChiefChief JusticeJustice ChanChan VisitsVisits thethe MalaysianMalaysian CourtsCourts InIn Summary:Summary: SAL’sSAL’s StrategicStrategic PlanningPlanning RetreatRetreat BDFQMQDPNIBTUIFTPMVUJPOUPZPVSBSDIJWJOHOFFET8JUI PVSTVQFSJPSTDBOUPGJMFTFSWJDFT ZPVOFWFSIBWFUPXPSSZ BCPVUVOXBOUFEQBQFSCVMLBHBJO 4FSWJDFTJODMVEF "UP"TJ[FQBQFSTDBO )JHI3FTPMVUJPOTDBOOJOH 4BWFUP1%'GPSNBU EJHJUBMmMFBSDIJWJOHIBTOFWFSCFFONBEFFBTJFS Powered by g Image Logic® GPSNPSFJOGPSNBUJPO WJTJUXXXBDFQMQDPNTH www.oce.com.sg [email protected] BDFQMQDPN1UF-UE FQSJOUJOHTDBOOJOHIVC 5FMFORVJSZ!BDFQMQDPNTH INTER ALIA The tragic events of 9/11 starkly remind us that the world now lives in a much more uncertain time. With this in mind, the legal profession in Singapore gathered this year, on 29 August 2006, for the 13th Singapore Academy of Law Annual Lecture delivered by The Right Honourable The Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. The lecture titled “Terrorism and Human Rights” highlighted the struggles facing the United Kingdom in balancing the right of a sovereign state to protect those within its territory from acts of terror, with the right of every individual to free access to and due process of the law – regardless of which side of the law an individual happens to fall. Lord Phillips illustrated, through detailed references to UK legislation and case law, how the UK courts have mediated between the Government’s responses to threats to national security and the need for such responses to be sensitive to the regime of human rights law applicable in the UK. In this issue of Inter Se, we feature highlights from Lord Phillips’s timely and thoughtful lecture together with excerpts from an interview with Lord Phillips on other changes taking place in the UK legal sphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Took Leng How V Public Prosecutor [2006]
    Took Leng How v Public Prosecutor [2006] SGCA 3 Case Number : Cr App 10/2005 Decision Date : 25 January 2006 Tribunal/Court : Court of Appeal Coram : Chao Hick Tin JA; Kan Ting Chiu J; Yong Pung How CJ Counsel Name(s) : Subhas Anandan, Anand Nalachandran, Sunil Sudheesan (Harry Elias Partnership) and Chung Ping Shen (H A and Chung Partnership) for the appellant; Jaswant Singh and David Khoo (Deputy Public Prosecutors) for the respondent Parties : Took Leng How — Public Prosecutor Criminal Law – Special exceptions – Diminished responsibility – Abnormality of mind – Whether accused suffering from abnormality of mind at time of offence – Whether abnormality impairing accused's cognitive functions or self-control – Section 300 Exception 7 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) Criminal Procedure and Sentencing – Trials – Adverse inferences – Accused appealing against conviction and death sentence for murder – Accused opting to remain silent at trial – Accused only person capable of shedding light on certain aspects of trial – Accused relying on defence of diminished responsibility – Whether appropriate to draw adverse inference in such circumstances – Section 196(2) Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) Evidence – Proof of evidence – Standard of proof – Reasonable doubt – Accused convicted and sentenced to death for smothering deceased to death – Accused appealing against conviction and sentence – Pathologist giving evidence that deceased could have suffered sudden onset of fits that could account for deceased's suffocation and death – Whether evidence casting reasonable doubt on Prosecution's case – Section 300 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) 25 January 2006 Judgment reserved. Chao Hick Tin JA (delivering the judgment of the majority): 1 The accused was convicted in the High Court for having committed murder under s 300 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) and was sentenced to suffer the mandatory death sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • Protection from Harassment Act 2014: Offences and Remedies Man YIP Singapore Management University, [email protected]
    Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 1-2015 Protection from harassment act 2014: Offences and remedies Man YIP Singapore Management University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research Part of the Law and Society Commons Citation YIP, Man. Protection from harassment act 2014: Offences and remedies. (2015). Research Collection School Of Law. Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2845 This Blog Post 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]. 6 January 2015 Opening of Legal Year 2015: A Year for Pushing Boundaries 5 January 2015 marked the Opening of the Legal Year 2015. From the speeches made by the Attorney-General, the President of the Law Society, and the Chief Justice, the 50th year of Singapore’s independence is going to be a glorious year of pushing boundaries. In his speech, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon outlined numerous events and developments that Singapore’s legal community can look forward to. Indeed, several events will be of great interest to the international legal community. In a nutshell, the theme for 2015 is about strengthening the administration of justice in two dimensions. The internationalist dimension is to consolidate Singapore’s position as the regional and international dispute resolution hub for commercial matters through, in particular, the establishment of the Singapore International Commercial Court (“SICC”), which was also launched at the Opening of Legal Year 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • 7. Civil Procedure
    (2007) 8 SAL Ann Rev Civil Procedure 99 7. CIVIL PROCEDURE Cavinder BULL SC MA (Oxford), LLM (Harvard); Barrister (Gray’s Inn), Attorney-at-Law (New York State); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore). Jeffrey PINSLER SC LLB (Liverpool), LLM (Cambridge), LLD (Liverpool); Barrister (Middle Temple), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Accounts 7.1 Where a party renders accounts in compliance with the terms of a judgment, it is not appropriate for the opposing party (who contests the accounting period relied upon) to make an application by summons for the purpose of determining the correct accounting period. This is a matter which must be left to the determination of the registrar at the inquiry into those accounts. Such an application was made pursuant to a consent judgment in Seiko Epson Corp v Sepoms Technology Pte Ltd [2007] 3 SLR 225. The High Court considered O 43 r 3 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) in conjunction with O 38 r 8 and concluded that an application for an interlocutory hearing by summons was misconceived (at [14]–[15]). Appeals Court’s discretion to waive security deposit 7.2 In Lee Hsien Loong v Singapore Democratic Party [2008] 1 SLR 757, the Court of Appeal held that the provision for security deposit stipulated in O 57 r 3(3) is mandatory and therefore cannot be waived by the court. 7.3 Waiving the provision for security deposit, even for a bankrupt, would effectively allow the applicant a right of appeal free from any need to compensate the plaintiffs if his appeal fails.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2011 (PDF, 3.39
    Annual Report 2011 CONTENTS VISION, MISSION AND VALUES 01 MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE 04 FOREWORD BY THE REGISTRAR 10 CONSTITUTION AND JURISDICTION 14 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS 18 - Opening of the Legal Year - Mass Call - International Conference on Electronic Litigation - Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences (LASCO) Tea THE SUPREME COURT BENCH 24 - Changes to the Bench - Highlights of Judges’ Events - Judges’ Participation in Local and Overseas Events INTERNATIONAL PROFILE 36 - Rankings in International Surveys - Overseas Conferences, Attachments and Speaking Engagements - Visits by Distinguished Guests STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT 42 - Supreme Court Staff Workplan Seminar - Legal Colloquium - Customer Service Conference - Supreme Court Translation Audio Resource System (STARS) - Organisational Accolades TIMELINESS OF JUSTICE 48 - Workload Statistics - Waiting Periods - Caseload and Disposal of Cases relating to Disciplinary Proceedings QUALITY OF JUSTICE 56 - Significant Decisions of the Court of Appeal - Recent Amendments to the Rules of Court and the Practice Directions ACCESSIBILITY TO THE COURTS 68 STAFF AND ORGANISATION 70 - Cohesion Day - Corporate Challenge - Staff Awards - Staff Welfare Activities - - Supreme Court Organisation Chart - Staff Photos VISION To establish and maintain a world-class Judiciary. MISSION To superintend the administration of justice. VALUES Integrity and Independence Public trust and confidence in the Supreme Court rests on its integrity and the transparency of its processes. The public must be assured that court decisions are fair and independent, that court staff are incorruptible, and that court records are accurate. Quality Public Service As a public institution dedicated to the administration of justice, the Supreme Court seeks to meet the needs of court users, with an emphasis on accessibility, quality and the timely delivery of services.
    [Show full text]
  • SAL Annual Report 2001
    SINGAPORE ACADEMY OF LAW ANNUAL REPORT Financial year 2001/2002 MISSION STATEMENT Building up the intellectual capital, capability and infrastructure of members of the Singapore Academy of Law. Promotion of esprit de corps among members of the Singapore Academy of Law. SINGAPORE ACADEMY OF LAW ANNUAL REPORT 1 April 2001 - 31 march 2002 5Foreword 7Introduction 13 Annual Report 2001/2002 43 Highlights of the Year 47 Annual Accounts 2001/2002 55 Thanking the Fraternity Located in City Hall, the Singapore Academy of Law is a body which brings together the legal profession in Singapore. FOReWoRD SINGAPORE ACADEMY OF LAW FOREWORD by Chief Justice Yong Pung How President, Singapore Academy of Law From a membership body in 1988 with a staff strength of less than ten, the Singapore Academy of Law has grown to become an internationally-recognised organisation serving many functions and having two subsidiary companies – the Singapore Mediation Centre and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre. The year 2001/2002 was a fruitful one for the Academy and its subsidiaries. The year kicked off with an immersion programme in Information Technology Law for our members. The inaugural issue of the Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Singapore Cases 2000 was published, followed soon after by the publication of a book, “Developments in Singapore Law between 1996 and 2000”. The Singapore International Arbitration Centre launched its Domestic Arbitration Rules in May 2001, and together with the Singapore Mediation Centre, launched the Singapore Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy for resolving “.sg” domain name disputes. The Academy created a Legal Development Fund of $5 million to be spread over 5 years for the development of the profession in new areas of law and practice.
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2018 Speech by Attorney-General
    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2018 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. Monday, 8 January 2018 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 1 2017 was indeed a momentous year for the Attorney-General’s Chambers (or AGC). It marked our 150th anniversary from the time Sir Thomas Braddell first took office as Attorney- General of the Straits Settlements in 1867. The leadership team at AGC has been humbled by the opportunity and privilege to lead AGC through such an important milestone in its history. 2 AGC occupies an important place in Singapore’s legal system. We all know that AGC has two key functions: (a) First, as Public Prosecutor. (b) Second, we are also the Government’s chief legal advisor. Our work impacts Singapore and Singaporeans. They are (after all) our ultimate clients. 3 AGC has played an instrumental role in building the foundations to Singapore’s legal system, especially since independence. For this, I must thank the former Attorney-General, V K Rajah SC, and his predecessors, some of whom are seated here this morning, for their efforts have collectively helped to mould the organisation into the premier legal institution that it is 1 today. Previous AGs have, on earlier occasions, described our work using the analogy of planting durian trees. It is apt for me to continue this imagery by stating that AGC, and Singapore in general, is reaping generous harvests from the seeds that each of the previous AGs have sown during their respective tenures (I dare say, of the “Mao Shan Wang” variety).
    [Show full text]
  • Opening of the Legal Year 2018 Speech by the President of the Law
    Opening of the Legal Year 2018 Speech by the President of the Law Society INTRODUCTION 1. May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Judges of Appeal, Judges and Judicial Commissioners. WELCOME 2. First, let me extend a warm welcome to our overseas Bar leaders hailing from Australia, Brunei, China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Myanmar and Taiwan. LAWASIA President Christopher Leong and Inter-Pacific Bar Association Vice President, Mr Francis Xavier SC are also special guests in this ceremony. 3. 2017 heralded significant developments in judicial offices in the Supreme Court :- a. Retirement of Justice Chao Hick Tin as a Judge of Appeal on 27 September 2017 marked by an unforgettable Valedictory Reference convened by the Supreme Court. We were pleased to read recently about Justice Chao’s appointment as Senior Judge for three years with effect from 5 January 2018. b. Appointment of Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang as Vice President of the Court of Appeal following his predecessor Justice Chao’s retirement. c. Appointment of Justice Steven Chong as Judge of Appeal. d. Appointment of then Deputy AG Tan Siong Thye and then Judicial Commissioners Chua Lee Ming, Kannan Ramesh, Aedit Abdullah, Valerie Thean, Debbie Ong and Hoo Sheau Peng as Judges of the Supreme Court. 4. Last week, Senior Judges Chan Sek Keong and Kan Ting Chiu retired; marking an end to their stellar and distinguished service on the Bench. Justices Andrew Ang, Tan Lee Meng and Lai Siu Chiu were reappointed as Senior Judges effective last Friday. 5. The Bar is certain that the new judicial appointees will leave their own individual, indelible imprint on Singapore jurisprudence.
    [Show full text]