DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report 2011 (PDF, 3.39

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. Learning and Innovation The Supreme Court recognises that to be a world-class Judiciary, we need to continually improve ourselves and our processes. We therefore encourage learning and innovation to take the Supreme Court to the highest levels of performance. Ownership We value the contributions of our staff, who are committed and proud to be part of the Supreme Court. 01 Judges and Staff of the Supreme Court of Singapore MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE Response of Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong delivered at the Opening of the Legal Year 2012 on 6 January 2012 Association and Mr Junius Ho, President of the Law Society of Hong Kong, and distinguished guests from other Commonwealth jurisdictions. We thank you all for being present here to participate in this annual tradition. On this occasion, we need to remind ourselves that we live in an imperfect and unequal world and all of us here who are involved in the administration of justice should do our utmost in achieving fair and just outcomes for litigants according to law. In this connection, I wish to thank the Attorney-General and the President of the Law Society for their assurances of their fullest support and co-operation for our endeavours in the coming year. I regard these assurances not as mere platitudes uttered Mr Attorney only on this occasion, but as vows of a calling. I also take note of the kind words and praise that Mr Wong Meng Meng SC, President of the Law the Attorney-General has expressed in respect of Society the contributions of Justice Kan Ting Chiu to the administration of justice in Singapore. We share in Members of the Bar these tributes to him, and we wish him a stress-free retirement. Ladies and Gentlemen, At last year’s Opening of the Legal Year, I spoke on On behalf of the Judiciary, I welcome you all to three main topics: (a) the state of criminal practice this morning’s ceremony to open the new Legal and the Criminal Bar, (b) the problem of missing Year. I also welcome the Chief Registrar of the clients’ monies in conveyancing matters, and (c) the Supreme Court of Brunei, Pengiran Hajah Rostaina need for a larger pool of expert litigation counsel binte Pengiran Haji Duraman; Mr Lim Chee Wee, to represent consumers and investors, especially President of the Malaysian Bar Council; Mr Kumar in advising and representing them in important Ramanathan SC, Chairman of the Hong Kong Bar financial or commercial claims against big business in 04 Message from the Chief Justice Singapore. I am happy to note that all these concerns also mulling over whether to make prior pro bono have been looked into and certain measures will be representation in criminal matters another criterion taken to alleviate some of these problems, as you for future appointments as Senior Counsel. I will have just heard from the Attorney-General and the seek the views of my Judges and the Law Society President of the Law Society. I would like to add a on this matter. few more observations on these and other matters. Pro bono work The state assigned counsel scheme – Mr Wong referred to the American Bar “LASCO” Association’s recommendation of 50 hours of The Law Society has worked with the Supreme pro bono work every year for its members, and Court Registry in making structural changes has suggested that global lawyers based here to LASCO, the acronym for the state assigned might wish to make cash donations in lieu of their counsel scheme, in order to improve the quality of domestic pro bono obligations.1 But, before representation in capital cases. We have constituted we ask others to contribute, the Bar has to lead a LASCO Selection Panel, whose members include by example. In this regard, I am glad to note Senior Counsel and members of the Criminal Bar, that, among other initiatives, the Bar has in 2011 to provide a more rigorous emplacement and contributed about $127,000 to the Law Society’s assignment process for counsel to lead in LASCO pro bono programme, CLAS, of which $76,000 matters. We have increased the honorarium came from the larger law firms. But the latter payable to counsel, but not to market rates. We group of firms can surely do better, considering must not forget that many of the defendants that the Law Society managed to raise more than concerned would not be able to afford what is twice that sum at its 2011 Charity Golf Tournament. being paid as honorarium to the two assigned With their lucrative corporate and civil litigation counsel under the scheme. The value of LASCO is practices, these firms sit atop of Singapore’s wealth not in the honorarium but counsel’s services. I am pole (to use the caption of a Business Times report glad that many LASCO volunteers have spoken published in its Christmas eve edition). They are out publicly that the motivation for their efforts is among the greatest beneficiaries of our laws and not the honorarium but the personal satisfaction legal system. In corporate law firms, lawyers can of providing the best possible defence for their only “eat what [they] kill”. As pro bono work brings clients, with the added sense of achievement nothing to the dinner table, one can understand if their clients are acquitted or the charges are why young aspiring corporate lawyers would reduced. While the number of qualified counsel be reluctant to do pro bono work. They can be on the Panel is certainly important, the quality of encouraged to do so if management provides counsel is even more crucial. In this connection, I them with an incentive, such as crediting their pro would urge the Senior Counsel Forum to persuade bono work with a notional income based on what its members to play a greater role in LASCO and they would have earned for the firm at their normal also in the Law Society’s own pro bono scheme, charge-out rates. Perhaps, law firms that are large ie, the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (“CLAS”). As enough might even consider setting up pro bono Senior Counsel are, by definition, the elite of the departments, as some American law firms have profession, it is only right that they take the lead done. This brings to mind another thought: the in accepting pro bono work. For that reason, I am Law Society might wish to consider publishing an 1 Speech of the President of the Law Society at the Opening of the Legal Year 2012, Singapore Law Gazette, January 2012, http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/president_ message/President_Message_for_Jan_2012.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2012) at p4. 05 annual pro bono league table, like in the US. This or Part B of their qualifying exams. I should add will enable the public, clients, law students and the that Singapore Management University (“SMU”) legal community to know the rankings of law firms J.D. students are required to perform 50 hours in terms of giving back to society. of community service attachment at a Voluntary Welfare Organisation or an organisation involved in I am also glad that Mr Wong has provided clarity to pro bono and legal aid work. the meaning of pro bono.2 It is not just free work, but free work for our poor “neighbours” without Clients’ monies in conveyancing matters expectation of any kind of material reward – it is In August 2011, the Ministry of Law established a the work of the Good Samaritan. It is not free work statutory scheme to prohibit conveyancers from provided to clients or even to the Council of the Law holding conveyancing monies in clients’ accounts. Society or the Singapore Academy of Law (“SAL”). Clients have been given three choices as to how to safeguard their funds, at different costs – (a) For many lawyers, pro bono as a social value the setting up of conveyancing accounts with does not come from nature, but from nurture.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Michael Green QC, Fountain Court
    Finance, Property and Business Litigation in a Changing World 25-26 April 2013 Supreme Court Auditorium Organisers: Finance, Property and Business Litigation in a Changing World Plenary Session 1: Finance Litigation Chairperson Mr Alvin Yeo SC , WongPartnership LLP Speakers Ms Geraldine Andrews QC, Essex Court Chambers Mr Peter de Verneuil Smith, 3Verulam Buildings Mr Hri Kumar Nair SC, Drew & Napier LLC FINANCIAL DERIVATIVES LITIGATION Geraldine Andrews Q.C. Essex Court Chambers The 2008 financial crisis Sept-Oct 2008 – the eye of the storm • 7th Sept - Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae effectively nationalized by US Government. • 14th Sept - Merrill Lynch shotgun wedding to Bank of America amidst fears of liquidity crisis • 15th Sept - Lehman Bros filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection. Periodically thereafter various of its subsidiaries did the same, including, on 3 Oct, LBSF, the dedicated subsidiary for derivative transactions. • 17th Sept - AIG, the USA䇻s largest insurer, was bailed out by US Govt with a loan of $85bn (insufficient funds to meet its CDS insurance obligations) Geraldine Andrews QC, Essex Court Chambers FINANCE, PROPERTY AND BUSINESS LITIGATION IN A CHANGING WORLD Sept-Oct 2008 – the eye of the storm • 17th Sept – Lloyds TSB takes over HBOS following a run on HBOS shares • 25th Sept – Washington Mutual sold to JP Morgan Chase for $1.9bn. • 3 Oct – US Congress approves 700bn bailout of the banks – the biggest financial rescue in US history. • 6-10 Oct - The worst week for the global stock market for 75 years. The Dow Jones index lost 22.1%, its worst week on record. Geraldine Andrews QC, Essex Court Chambers FINANCE, PROPERTY AND BUSINESS LITIGATION IN A CHANGING WORLD Sept-Oct 2008 – the eye of the storm • 7 Oct - Icelandic banking system collapses • 11 Oct Highest volatility day recorded in the 112 year history of the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • The Effects of the Cla 1956 on Judicial
    THE EFFECTS OF THE CLA 1956 ON JUDICIAL DISCRETION, QUANTUM OF DAMAGES AND INTEREST ON DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY AND FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS : A CRITICAL APPRAISAL NAZLI BINTI MAHDZIR THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN LAW INSTITUTE OF GRADUATE STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2014 i UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION Name of Candidate : Nazli Binti Mahdzir Registration No : LHA 090003 Name of Degree : Doctor of Philosophy Title of Thesis : The Effects of the CLA 1956 on Judicial Discretion, Quantum of Damages and Interest on Damages in Personal Injury and Fatal Accident Claims Arising Out of Motor Vehicle Accidents : A Critical Appraisal Field of Study : Insurance and Personal Injury Law I do solemnly and sincerely declare that: 1. I am the sole author / writer of this Work; 2. This Work is original; 3. Any use of Work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for permitted purposes and any excerpt of extract form, or reference to or production of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly or sufficiently and the title of the work and its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work; 4. I do have actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of this Work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work; 5. I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the University of Malaya (UM), who henceforth shall be the owner of the copyright on this Work and that any production of use in any form or by any mean whatsoever is prohibited without written consent of UM first had and obtained; i 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Singapore
    SUPREME COURT OF SINGAPORE 2012ANNUAL REPORT 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, court staff are incorruptible, and court records are accurate. Quality Public Service As a public institution dedicated to the administration of justice, the Supreme Court seeks to tailor its processes to meet the needs of court users, with an emphasis on accessibility, quality and the timely delivery of services. Learning and Innovation The Supreme Court recognises that to be a world-class Judiciary, we need to continually improve ourselves and our processes. We therefore encourage learning and innovation to take the Supreme Court to the highest levels of performance. Ownership We value the contributions of our staff, who are committed and proud to be part of the Supreme Court. SUPREME COURT ANNUAL REPORT 2012 01 Contents 02 46 MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT • Launch of eLitigation 14 • Launch of the Centralised Display CONSTITUTION AND JURISDICTION Management System (CDMS) • Supreme Court Staff Workplan 18 Seminar SIGNIFICANT EVENTS • Legal Colloquium • Opening of the Legal Year • Organisational Accolades • 2nd Joint Judicial Conference • Mass Call 52 • Launch of The Learning Court TIMELINESS OF JUSTICE • Legal Assistance Scheme for • Workload
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Civil Procedure
    156 SAL Annual Review (2010) 11 SAL Ann Rev 8. 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. Affidavits 8.1 In Drydocks World LLC v Tan Boy Tee [2010] SGHC 248, the High Court reiterated that as O 41 r 5(2) of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) (“RoC”) (which enables an affidavit deponent to refer to statements of information or belief) only applies to interlocutory proceedings, it does not operate where the plaintiff is seeking final relief affecting the rights of the parties. Amendments 8.2 In Navigator Investment Services Ltd v Acclaim Insurance Brokers Pte Ltd [2010] 1 SLR 25 (“Navigator”), the Court of Appeal allowed an amendment to a summons that had been filed in proceedings commenced by originating summons. The amendment was to include s 6 of the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) (“IAA”) as a ground for staying the originating summons. The Court of Appeal held (Navigator at [26]) that whilst the appellant had sought to amend the summons at a very late stage, the issue of whether an arbitration was governed by the IAA or the Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 2002 Rev Ed) (“AA”) was a question of law and it was difficult to see how there could be any prejudice that could not be compensated by an appropriate costs order.
    [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]
  • 2021-Sghc-146-Pdf.Pdf
    IN THE GENERAL DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2021] SGHC 146 Magistrate’s Appeal No 9068 of 2019/01 Between Parti Liyani … Appellant And Public Prosecutor … Respondent JUDGMENT [Criminal Procedure and Sentencing] — [Compensation and costs] [Statutory Interpretation] — [Construction of statute] — [Purposive approach] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..........................................................................4 THE PARTIES’ CASES..................................................................................8 THE YOUNG AMICUS CURIAE’S SUBMISSIONS................................17 ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED ..................................................................24 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY...........................................................................24 THE LAW.......................................................................................................27 ISSUE 1: THE MEANING OF “THE PROSECUTION WAS FRIVOLOUS OR VEXATIOUS” IN S 359(3) CPC...................................33 THE FIRST STAGE OF THE TAN CHENG BOCK FRAMEWORK ...........................35 The various possible meanings of “the prosecution” ..............................35 The various possible meanings of “frivolous or vexatious”....................39 (1) The meaning of “frivolous or vexatious” in local cases dealing with costs orders against the Prosecution under the CPC .......................................................................................39
    [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]