DOCSLIB.ORG

Lawlink 2017 Contents 03 Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

December 2017 ISSN: 0219 - 6441 Honouring EW Barker PLUS NUS Law Celebrates Moot Victories Diamond Jubilee New Centre for Pro Bono Efforts Faculty Features Book Launches Pioneer Graduates Welcome New Generation New Masters in International Arbitration REUNIONS! & Dispute Resolution Classes of 1982, 1987, 1992, 1997 & 2007 THE ALUMNI MAGAZINE OF From left: Ambassador-at-Large Professor Tommy Koh ‘61, Dean of NUS Law Professor Simon Chesterman, THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE former Chief Justice Mr Chan Sek Keong ‘61, Emeritus Professor Koh Kheng Lian ‘61, FACULTY OF LAW Ms Tan Leng Fong ‘61 and Mr Amarjeet Singh SC ‘61 PIONEER GRADUATES WELCOME NEXT GENERATION The Class of 1961 joined the Class of 2017 at this year’s Commencement on 8 July at the University Cultural Centre Members of the Class of 1961 at Commencement 2017. Front row (from left): Ms Aileen Lim, Ms Tan Leng Fong, and Emeritus Professor Koh Kheng Lian Back row (from left): Ambassador-at-Large Professor Tommy Koh, Mr Foo Yew Heng, Mr Amarjeet Singh SC, former Chief Justice Mr Chan Sek Keong, and former Solicitor- General Mr Koh Eng Tian This year marked the 60th Anniversary of firms thought that those who qualified As over 300 of this year’s graduates sat the first intake of law students at NUS in England had a superior hallmark. among the faculty’s pioneer batch and and the Faculty was particularly delighted But the Class of 1961 quickly put that renowned members of our alumni, it was to welcome eight members from this misconception right. I would like to a timely reminder of how the Class of 1961 first cohort (the Class of 1961) who were recognise three of them whom as a law set the bar high for all the generations present to share the celebrations! student I looked up to. Chan Sek Keong, that have followed, each breaking the finest legal mind Singapore has down barriers for the next generation of Presiding over the ceremony was former known. Tommy Koh, the finest diplomat legal pioneers. Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, NUS Singapore has produced. T.P.B. Menon ‘61, Pro-Chancellor, and the guest speaker Singapore’s finest Chancery lawyer until Reuben Ong ’17, valedictorian for the was the Honourable V.K. Rajah SC ‘82, he left active practice. Two of them are Class of 2017, thanked professors and former Attorney-General and Judge here today to personally welcome you loved ones. Addressing his classmates, of Appeal. The Class of 1961 was also to the legal fraternity and demonstrably Reuben said, “I’m sure all of us have represented by Ambassador-at-Large show that the legal profession is more experienced moments in law school when Professor Tommy Koh, Emeritus Professor than a business. We are a community we felt that the challenges and difficulties Koh Kheng Lian, Ms Tan Leng Fong, bound together by shared values, ethical that we faced were almost overwhelming Ms Aileen Lim, Mr Amarjeet Singh SC, precepts and common aspirations.” – the weeks were short but days were Mr Foo Yew Heng, and former Solicitor- long, and every moment seemed to General Mr Koh Eng Tian. He also had this advice for the Class of have an opportunity cost attached. In 2017, “You must have a deep appreciation such circumstances, a kind word or In tribute to the pioneer class, that the practice of law is ultimately caring gesture can go a long way, and Mr V.K. Rajah said, “The Class of 1961, about values and that it has a real impact I hope that we will continue as a batch Singapore’s very first law graduates, is on people’s lives. As professionals, we to support one another in this way, even well represented here. Some of them subscribe to higher values that must if we find ourselves seated on opposite initially faced some job discrimination. always include fair play.” ends of the table.” Englishmen who then ran the largest law 02 LAWLINK 2017 CONTENTS 03 CONTENTS 4 8 24 34 44 47 Dean’s Diary 60th Anniversary Special Faculty Highlights Student Features Alumni Spotlight Reunions NUS Law Celebrates 8 Long Service Awards 2017 24 NUS Law Students Launch 34 Kenneth Lim ’04: 44 Class of 1982 47 Diamond Jubilee Guidebook on Practice of Defying Law of the Odds 6 Alan Tan ’93 & Swati Jhaveri Win 25 Muslim Law Class of 1987 48 Home is Where the Heart is 12 Teaching Excellence Award Law Alumni Mentor Programme 46 Benefactors AG Lucien Wong SC ’78 Delivers 37 Class of 1992 49 60th Anniversary Alumni 14 NUS Law Recognises Students’ 26 SLR Annual Lecture Movie Night: Justice League Pro Bono Initiatives Class of 1997 50 Law IV: Judicial Review 38 NUS Law Honours Singapore’s 16 International Advisory Panel 28 Class of 2007 51 Pioneer Law Minister EW Barker Visits NUS Law RAG & Flag 39 Shanghai Reunion 52 New Centre for Pro Bono Efforts 18 5th Asian Law Schools 28 Moot Victories 40 Deans’ Forum London Reunion 53 New at NUS Law: International 20 Arbitration & Dispute Resolution SAL Undergraduate Scholarship 29 LL.M. (IADR) Established for Needy Students 54 Meet the Faculty 22 Kwa Geok Choo Distinguished 30 Visitors Lectures NUS Giving Book Launches 32 Alumni Scholarship a Boon 54 for Law Student Saw Swee Hock Centennial 36 Professorial Lecture Young Alumna Believes in Giving Back Early 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/alumni_update_particulars.asp 04 LAWLINK 2017 DEAN’S DIARY 05 supply of lawyers. (I hasten to add that DEAN’S DIARY all of our graduates who seek training contracts continue to get them.) The importance of the rule of law to A diamond jubilee is a time for celebration, to look backwards as well as Singapore is no longer questioned, forwards. This year, we have aimed to do all three of these things in celebration however, and indeed NUS Law is not of sixty years of legal education at NUS Law. only expected to produce highly-qualified graduates, but also help position Singapore as a thought-leader in legal research. We have had parties, as at the 60th Anniversary Celebration Dinner and So, in one sense, a law school is a set of the Alumni Movie Night. We have studied buildings; in another, it is a set of ideas. our history, in the form of a special issue Yet even the finest classrooms and the of the Singapore Journal of Legal Studies richest body of scholarship would be and a commemorative volume written by nothing without the people that pass 60th Anniversary Celebration Dinner. From left: Dean Simon Chesterman, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon ’86, our own Kevin Tan ’86. And we are laying through those halls and engage with Ms Olivia Anne D’Costa ’86, Professor S. Jayakumar ’63 and NUS President Designate Professor Tan Eng Chye the foundation for the future through the that material. And so the history of NUS NUS Law Student Support Fund, to ensure Law is, ultimately, a story of teachers and Singapore on the international stage. Still that all deserving students can take full of students. others use their legal training to start new advantage of a legal education without ventures in the corporate world, or apply regard to their financial circumstances. In six decades, NUS Law has seen their skills with language as playwrights hundreds of full-time and adjunct faculty or actors. For my own part, during this year, I have teach more than ten thousand students. repeatedly come back to a very basic Today, we are widely recognised as the The story of NUS Law is, therefore, question: What is a law school? best law school in Asia. That status is the story of an institution and of its based, to some extent, on the quality of evolving role in Singapore. But the In one sense, a law school is a set of our faculty and the research we produce. richness of that tale lies in the lived buildings. And the history of NUS Law is, experiences of the men and women in part, a tale of architecture. But the rankings that support such a claim who studied and taught, mooted and make clear that our greatest asset is not our published, graduated from and gave The campus on which the first Singaporean facilities or even the knowledge created back to their alma mater — through law students were admitted, sixty years here — it is our students and our alumni. their achievements, their financial Jessup Moot Champions 1982. From left: Former ago, nestles at the edge of the Botanic support, and the opportunities that they Attorney-General V.K. Rajah SC ‘82, Davinder Singh Over sixty years, our alumni have gone create for the next generation of NUS SC ‘82, Judge of Appeal Steven Chong SC ‘82 and Gardens, its whitewashed cloisters Jimmy Yim SC ‘82 chosen from an Empire-wide architectural on to leadership roles in all parts of the Law students. competition. Those students enrolled as Singapore profession, as well as top law over sixty years. Thank you for all your colonial subjects in the new Department firms in New York and London, Shanghai The history of NUS Law is, then, support up to now. And thank you for all of Law of the University of Malaya; they and Hong Kong. your history. that we aspire to do together in the future.
Recommended publications
  • 2018 ANNUAL MEETING from Imitation to Innovation

    2018 ANNUAL MEETING from Imitation to Innovation

    2018 ANNUAL MEETING From Imitation to Innovation NOVEMBER 10 – 12, 2018 DOHA, QATAR HOSTED BY INDEX WELCOME ………………………………………………………………………… 3 AGENDA …………………………………………………………………………... 4 GROUP BREAKOUTS …………………………………………………………… 10 GOVERNING BOARD …………………………………………………………… 13 DOCTRINAL STUDY GROUPS ………………………………………………… 14 UNIVERSITIES ATTENDING …………………………………………………… 15 BOARD OF GOVERNORS ATTENDEES ……………………………………... 17 QATAR UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF LAW ATTENDEES …………………. 21 JUDICIAL ATTENDEES …………………………………………………………. 25 ATTENDEES ……………………………………………………………………… 29 SECRETARIAT …………………………………………………………………… 58 SINGAPORE DECLARATION ………………………………………………….. 59 MADRID PROTOCOL ……………………………………………………………. 61 JUDICIAL STANDARDS OF A LEGAL EDUCATION ……………………….. 62 SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT ………………………………………………… 63 EVALUATION, ASSISTANCE, AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAM ……….. 66 2 WELCOME On behalf of all the members of the International Association of Law Schools Board of Governors, we want to welcome each and every one of you to our 2018 Annual Meeting. This is our eleventh annual meeting where over 115 law teachers from more than 30 countries have gathered together to discuss and formulate new strategies to improve legal education globally. Almost half of our participants are senior law school leaders (deans, vice deans and associate deans). We warmly welcome all the familiar faces from these many years – welcome and thank you for your continued engagement in advancing the cause of improving legal education globally. For those who are new, a special warm welcome from our community. Please meet your colleagues from around the world. We look forward to working with you in this challenging and engaging effort. The IALS is a non-political, non-profit learned society of more than 160 law schools and departments from over 55 countries representing more than 7,500 law faculty members. One of our primary missions is the improvement of law schools and conditions of legal education throughout the world by learning from each other.
  • The Criminal Procedure Code 2010

    The Criminal Procedure Code 2010

    (2011) 23 SAcLJ Modernising the Criminal Justice Framework 23 MODERNISING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE FRAMEWORK The Criminal Procedure Code 2010 The concept of “balancing” prevalent in criminal justice discourse is premised on a paradigm where “state” and “individual” interests are perpetually in conflict. This article outlines the key components of the new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 and discusses another dimension of the state- individual relationship. Rather than being inherently incompatible, synergistic common goals can, on occasion, be pursued between the State and an accused. The article will also consider areas in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 where conflicts between “state” and “individual” interests have in fact arisen, and will outline the pragmatic approach that has been adopted towards their resolution. Melanie CHNG* LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore), LLM (Harvard); Advocate & Solicitor (Singapore); Assistant Director, Ministry of Law. The criminal process is at the heart of the criminal justice system. It is not only a subject of great practical importance; it is also a reflection of our ideals and values as to the way in which we can accord justice to both the guilty and to the innocent.[1] I. Introduction 1 The recent legislative amendments to Singapore’s Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) signify a new chapter in the continuing evolution of Singapore’s criminal justice process. The new Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (“New CPC”),2 which came into force on * The opinions expressed in this article are those of its author and are not representative of the official position or policies of the Singapore government. The author is grateful to Mr Amarjeet Singh SC, Ms Jennifer Marie SC, Mr Bala Reddy, Professor Michael Hor, Mr Subhas Anandan, Ms Valerie Thean and Mr Desmond Lee for their invaluable comments on an earlier draft of this article.
  • 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.
  • [Webinar] SAL Annual Review Series 2021 Singapore Cases in 2020

    [Webinar] SAL Annual Review Series 2021 Singapore Cases in 2020

    [Webinar] SAL Annual Review Series 2021 Singapore Cases in 2020 In conjunction with the Singapore Academy of Law's Annual Review of Singapore cases 2020, this series of webinars will evaluate the decisions of the Singapore Courts in 2020 as well as highlight the developments in the principal areas of the law that have taken place since. L I FTED by Legal Practitioner Specialisms Webinar In-House Counsel Specialisms Legal Support Specialisms SAL Annual Review Series 2021 Annual Review of 2020 Cases on: Wed, 23 Jun Land Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Wed, 30 Jun Confidential Information and Data Protection Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Mon, 19 Jul Criminal Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Thu, 22 Jul Competition Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Tue, 27 Jul Tort Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Wed, 28 Jul Intellectual Property Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Wed, 11 Aug Muslim Law Register here 1.5 CPD 4pm - 5.30pm Registration All prices indicated include GST. Annual Review Series 2021 Bundle A: SGD 385.20 SGD 267.50 1. Confidential Information and Data Protection 2. Competition Law 3. Tort Law 4. Intellectual Property Law Annual Review Series 2021 Bundle B: SGD 385.20 SGD 267.50 1. Land Law 2. Criminal Law 3. Tort Law 4. Muslim Law Price per session SGD 96.30 SAL Associate Student Member (To apply, click here) SGD 32.10 per session SAL Annual Review Series 2021 Tue, 23 June Annual Review of 2020 Cases on Land Law This session will encompass a discussion on selected cases decided in the past 5 years up to December 2020.
  • SOL LLM Brochure 2021 Copy

    SOL LLM Brochure 2021 Copy

    SMU – Right in the Heart of Asia’s Hub, Singapore Masters of Laws In the dynamic, cosmopolitan hub that is Singapore, you will find a vibrant city-state that pulses with the diversity of both East and West. LL.M. in Judicial Studies Situated at the cross-roads of the world, Singapore is home to multinational companies and thousands of small and medium-sized LL.M. in Cross-border Business and Finance Law in Asia enterprises flourishing in a smart city renowned for its business excellence and connectivity. With its strong infrastructure, political Dual LL.M. in Commercial Law (Singapore & London) stability and respect for intellectual property rights, this City in a Garden offers you unique opportunities to develop as a global citizen. Thorough. Transnational. Transformative. Tapping into the energy of the city is a university with a difference — the Singapore Management University. Our six schools: the School of Accountancy, Lee Kong Chian School of Business, School of Computing and Information Systems, School of Economics, Yong Pung How School of Law, and School of Social Sciences form the country’s only city campus, perfectly sited to foster strategic links with businesses and the community. Modelled after the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, SMU generates leading-edge research with global impact and produces broad-based, creative and entrepreneurial leaders for a knowledge-based economy. Discover a multi-faceted lifestyle right here at SMU, in the heart of Singapore. The SMU Masters Advantage GLOBAL RECOGNITION SMU is globally recognised as one of the best specialised universities in Asia and the world.
  • Rule of Law Without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective

    Rule of Law Without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective

    Griffith Asia Institute Research Paper Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective Stephen McCarthy and Kheang Un ii About the Griffith Asia Institute The Griffith Asia Institute produces relevant, interdisciplinary research on key developments in the politics, security and economies of the Asia-Pacific. By promoting knowledge of Australia’s changing region and its importance to our future, the Griffith Asia Institute seeks to inform and foster academic scholarship, public awareness and considered and responsive policy making. The Institute’s work builds on a long Griffith University tradition of providing multidisciplinary research on issues of contemporary significance in the region. Griffith was the first University in the country to offer Asian Studies to undergraduate students and remains a pioneer in this field. This strong history means that today’s Institute can draw on the expertise of some 50 Asia–Pacific focused academics from many disciplines across the university. The Griffith Asia Institute’s ‘Research Papers’ publish the institute’s policy-relevant research on Australia and its regional environment. The texts of published papers and the titles of upcoming publications can be found on the Institute’s website: www.griffith.edu.au/asiainstitute ‘Rule of Law without Democratization: Cambodia and Singapore in Comparative Perspective’ 2018 iii About the Authors Stephen McCarthy Stephen McCarthy is a Senior Lecturer in South East Asian politics in the School of Government and International Relations and a member of the Griffith Asia Institute at Griffith University. He received his PhD in political science from Northern Illinois University and has published widely on Burmese politics and South East Asia in international journals including The Pacific Review, Asian Survey, Pacific Affairs, Democratization and International Political Science Review.
  • The Evolution of the Singapore Criminal Justice Process

    The Evolution of the Singapore Criminal Justice Process

    (2019) 31 SAcLJ 1042 (Published on e-First 23 July 2019) THE EVOLUTION OF THE SINGAPORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS This article analyses the Singapore criminal justice process in the context of Herbert Packer’s Crime Control and Due Process models. It begins by analysing the features and goals of the two models before applying them to recent changes and developments in the Singapore criminal justice system. The article will focus in particular on developments in societal attitudes and values, legislative and executive policy, detention without trial, amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed), the statement of facts in guilty-plea cases, Kadar disclosure and the judicial discretion to exclude evidence. Following an analysis of these developments, the article will then assess the change in balance between the two models in the Singapore criminal justice system as well as comment on the trend and future of our criminal justice process. Keith Jieren THIRUMARAN LLB (Hons) (National University of Singapore) I. Introduction 1 The criminal justice process is the backbone of society that provides the context in which the substantive criminal law operates. The process includes all the activities “that operate to bring the substantive law of crime to bear (or to keep it from coming to bear)” on accused persons.1 In his seminal book2 and article,3 Herbert Packer espoused two renowned models that elucidate the framework for analysing the criminal justice process: the Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model. This article will analyse the unique Singapore criminal justice process to determine where it currently lies on the spectrum between the two models.
  • 4 Comparative Law and Constitutional Interpretation in Singapore: Insights from Constitutional Theory 114 ARUN K THIRUVENGADAM

    4 Comparative Law and Constitutional Interpretation in Singapore: Insights from Constitutional Theory 114 ARUN K THIRUVENGADAM

    Evolution of a Revolution Between 1965 and 2005, changes to Singapore’s Constitution were so tremendous as to amount to a revolution. These developments are comprehensively discussed and critically examined for the first time in this edited volume. With its momentous secession from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965, Singapore had the perfect opportunity to craft a popularly-endorsed constitution. Instead, it retained the 1958 State Constitution and augmented it with provisions from the Malaysian Federal Constitution. The decision in favour of stability and gradual change belied the revolutionary changes to Singapore’s Constitution over the next 40 years, transforming its erstwhile Westminster-style constitution into something quite unique. The Government’s overriding concern with ensuring stability, public order, Asian values and communitarian politics, are not without their setbacks or critics. This collection strives to enrich our understanding of the historical antecedents of the current Constitution and offers a timely retrospective assessment of how history, politics and economics have shaped the Constitution. It is the first collaborative effort by a group of Singapore constitutional law scholars and will be of interest to students and academics from a range of disciplines, including comparative constitutional law, political science, government and Asian studies. Dr Li-ann Thio is Professor of Law at the National University of Singapore where she teaches public international law, constitutional law and human rights law. She is a Nominated Member of Parliament (11th Session). Dr Kevin YL Tan is Director of Equilibrium Consulting Pte Ltd and Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore where he teaches public law and media law.
  • JUDICIARY TIMES - Issue 01

    JUDICIARY TIMES - Issue 01

    JUDICIARY TIMES - ISSUE 01 ISSUE 01 | MAY 2018 JUDICIARY TIMES Opening of Twelve Key Initiatives The Family Justice Legal Year 2018: Announced at Courts Workplan 2018: Towards a Future- State Courts In the Next Phase Ready Legal Sector Workplan 2018 1 JUDICIARY TIMES - ISSUE 01 CONTENTS ISSUE 01 | MAY 2018 01 03 04 OPENING OF JUDGES AND TWELVE KEY LEGAL YEAR 2018: INTERNATIONAL InitiatiVES Towards A JUDGES ATTEND ANNOUNCED at FUTURE-Ready SICC 2018 State Courts LEGAL Sector WORKPLAN 2018 05 06 07 International THE Family Court AND TRIBUNAL IT DEVELOPMENTS JUSTICE Courts Administrators AND ITS IMPACT WORKPLAN 2018: attend THE ON LAW IN THE NEXT PHASE EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP ProGRAMME 2 JUDICIARY TIMES - ISSUE 01 07 08 08 SMU SCHOOL Volunteer TRAINING FOR OF LAW HOSTS Mediators newly recruited LUNCH FOR attend TRAINING Volunteer SUPREME COURT ProGRAMME Support PERSONS BENCH 09 09 10 State Courts State Courts THE JUDICIARY introduces launcH GIVES Back to DOCUMENTS-Only PHASE 2 SOCIETY process FOR OF THE CJTS CIVIL CASES 11-13 14 15 15 16 NotaBLE WHAT’S AWARDS & UPCOMING BEHIND THE VISITS NEW ACCOLADES EVENTS SCENES 3 JUDICIARY TIMES - ISSUE 01 HIGHLIGHTS OPENING OF LEGAL YEAR 2018: Towards A FUTURE - Ready LEGAL Sector The Opening of the Legal Year on 8 January was Chief Justice also highlighted the challenges ahead for marked by the traditional ceremony that took place the legal fraternity and the courts, which included in the morning at the Supreme Court Auditorium, the potential disruptive force of technology and the followed by the Judiciary Dinner held at the Istana.
  • 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.
  • 170702Mindmap Copy

    170702Mindmap Copy

    Who said what Numerous allegations have been made in the ongoing feud between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his siblings, from misuse of power to a conict Against Lee Hsien Loong of interest in preparing the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s last will. Insight charts the Against Teo Chee Hean • Allegation: PM Lee misused his claims and accusations in the dispute over the fate of 38, Oxley Road. • Allegation: Committee focused power to prevent the house from solely on challenging validity of being demolished demolition clause in Mr Lee’s will PM’s response: Denied the DPM Teo’s response: Not true that “baseless” allegations, will refute committee bent on preventing them in a ministerial statement in demolition of the house Parliament tomorrow • Allegation: Committee did not • Allegation: PM Lee made disclose options in prior exchanges, contradictory statements about only identied members and its their father’s wishes and the house terms of reference when “forced in public and private into the daylight” Ms Indranee Rajah’s DPM Teo’s response: Nothing response: Notes that secret about committee; it is like Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s numerous other committees last will specically Cabinet sets up to consider specic accepts and Against Ho Ching Against K. Shanmugam issues acknowledges that DPM Tharman Allegation: Has a pervasive Allegation: Conict of interest demolition may not take place. • • Shanmugaratnam’s inuence on government, well being on ministerial committee, response: Cabinet has beyond her job scope having advised the late Mr Lee and • Allegation: Did not challenge the numerous committees family about the house last will in court when probate was on whole range of granted • Allegation: Removed the late Mr Mr Shanmugam’s response: issues, to help think Lee’s items from house without PM’s response: Wanted to avoid a Calls the claim ridiculous; says through difcult choices approval; represented the Prime public ght that would tarnish the nothing he said precluded him from Minister’s Ofce despite not family name serving in committee.
  • The Decline of Oral Advocacy Opportunities: Concerns and Implications

    The Decline of Oral Advocacy Opportunities: Concerns and Implications

    Published on 6 September 2018 THE DECLINE OF ORAL ADVOCACY OPPORTUNITIES: CONCERNS AND IMPLICATIONS [2018] SAL Prac 1 Singapore has produced a steady stream of illustrious and highly accomplished advocates over the decades. Without a doubt, these advocates have lifted and contributed to the prominence and reputation of the profession’s ability to deliver dispute resolution services of the highest quality. However, the conditions in which these advocates acquired, practised and honed their advocacy craft are very different from those present today. One trend stands out, in particular: the decline of oral advocacy opportunities across the profession as a whole. This is no trifling matter. The profession has a moral duty, if not a commercial imperative, to apply itself to addressing this phenomenon. Nicholas POON* LLB (Singapore Management University); Director, Breakpoint LLC; Advocate and Solicitor, Supreme Court of Singapore. I. Introduction 1 Effective oral advocacy is the bedrock of dispute resolution.1 It is also indisputable that effective oral advocacy is the product of training and experience. An effective advocate is forged in the charged atmosphere of courtrooms and arbitration chambers. An effective oral advocate does not become one by dint of age. 2 There is a common perception that sustained opportunities for oral advocacy in Singapore, especially for junior lawyers, are on the decline. This commentary suggests * This commentary reflects the author’s personal opinion. The author would like to thank the editors of the SAL Practitioner, as well as Thio Shen Yi SC and Paul Tan for reading through earlier drafts and offering their thoughtful insights. 1 Throughout this piece, any reference to “litigation” is a reference to contentious dispute resolution practice, including but not limited to court and arbitration proceedings, unless otherwise stated.