DOCSLIB.ORG

191011---Ahtc-2019-Sghc-241-Pdf.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
191011---Ahtc-2019-Sghc-241-Pdf.Pdf IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2019] SGHC 241 Suit Nos 668 and 716 of 2017 Between (1) Aljunied-Hougang Town Council … Plaintiff in S 668/2017 (2) Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council … Plaintiff in S 716/2017 And (1) Sylvia Lim Swee Lian (2) Low Thia Khiang (3) Pritam Singh (4) Chua Zhi Hon (5) Kenneth Foo Seck Guan (6) How Weng Fan (7) How Weng Fan (personal representative of the estate of Danny Loh Chong Meng, deceased, in his personal capacity and trading as FM Solutions & Integrated Services) (8) FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd … Defendants JUDGMENT [Equity] — [Fiduciary relationships] — [When arising] [Equity] — [Fiduciary relationships] — [Duties] [Trusts] — [Accessory liability] [Trusts] — [Recipient liability] [Statutory interpretation] — [Construction of statute] [Equity] — [Defences] — [Limitation] [Equity] — [Relief] — [Against penalties] [Equity] — [Remedies] — [Account] [Equity] — [Remedies] — [Equitable compensation] [Equity] — [Remedies] — [Rescission] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND FACTS ................................................................................7 DRAMATIS PERSONAE .....................................................................................7 The plaintiffs in Suit Nos 668 and 716 .......................................................7 The defendants in Suit Nos 668 and 716....................................................9 CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE PRESENT SUITS........................................13 UNDISPUTED FACTS AND KEY DOCUMENTS ...................................................14 Correspondence after the 2011 GE up to 30 May 2011 ..........................15 Meeting with CPG on 30 May 2011.........................................................20 Presentation by FMSS on 2 June 2011 ....................................................20 The first Town Council meeting on 9 June 2011......................................22 Correspondence with AIM regarding TCMS ...........................................23 Events in between the first and second Town Council meetings..............24 The second Town Council meeting on 4 August 2011 .............................30 Events following the second Town Council meeting................................31 Correspondence leading to the award of the first EMSU contract to FMSS....................................................................................................32 Events leading up to the award of the second MA contract and second EMSU contract to FMSS..............................................................35 Circumstances leading to the award of miscellaneous contracts to third party contractors .............................................................................38 (1) LST Architects ............................................................................38 (2) Red-Power...................................................................................39 (3) Rentokil.......................................................................................40 (4) Titan and J Keart .........................................................................40 i PARTIES’ CASES .........................................................................................41 THE PLAINTIFFS’ CASE ..................................................................................41 The defendants owe fiduciary duties to the plaintiffs and/or were trustees .....................................................................................................42 The defendants breached their duties in the award of the first and second MA and EMSU contracts .............................................................43 (1) The first MA contract..................................................................44 (2) The first EMSU contract .............................................................45 (3) The second MA contract and second EMSU contract ................46 The defendants breached their duties in failing to ensure meaningful oversight over payments to FMSS and FMSI........................48 (1) Project management fees paid to FMSS .....................................49 (2) Invoice of $106,559 paid to FMSS on 30 June 2011 and invoice of $166,591 paid to FMSS on 31 July 2011...................50 (3) Miscellaneous improper payments to FMSS and FMSI .............50 The defendants improperly awarded contracts to various third parties.......................................................................................................51 (1) LST Architects ............................................................................51 (2) Red-Power...................................................................................51 (3) Rentokil.......................................................................................52 (4) Breaches following the expiry of contracts for services in Punggol-East ...............................................................................52 The first to fifth defendants failed to ensure that payments made to third parties were substantiated by supporting documents or subject to properly authorised and certified invoices ..............................53 (1) 12 invoices totalling $171,112.62 ...............................................54 (2) 56 invoices totalling $674,388.70 ...............................................54 The defendants are not entitled to rely on s 52 of the TCA......................54 Remedies sought.......................................................................................54 (1) AHTC..........................................................................................55 (2) Additional claims by PRPTC......................................................56 ii (3) Bifurcation ..................................................................................57 THE DEFENDANTS’ CASE ...............................................................................58 The defendants do not owe fiduciary duties to AHTC..............................58 The waiver of tender and appointment of FMSS in relation to the first and second MA and EMSU contracts was proper............................59 (1) The first MA contract..................................................................59 (2) The first EMSU contract .............................................................60 (3) The second MA and EMSU contracts.........................................61 The payments to FMSS were proper ........................................................61 The appointment of and payments to third party contractors were proper.......................................................................................................62 (1) LST Architects ............................................................................63 (2) Red-Power...................................................................................63 (3) Rentokil.......................................................................................64 (4) Inclusion of Punggol-East under contracts with Red- Power and Rentokil.....................................................................64 (5) Appointment of Titan and J Keart under new contracts .............64 (6) Payments of 12 invoices in November 2015 ..............................65 (7) Payment of 56 invoices in November 2015 ................................65 The defendants acted in good faith and are protected by s 52 TCA ........65 The claims are time-barred......................................................................66 ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED ..................................................................66 MY DECISION ON LIABILITY .................................................................68 DUTIES OWED BY THE DEFENDANTS TO AHTC .............................................68 Did the first to fifth defendants owe AHTC fiduciary duties?..................68 (1) The nature of fiduciary duties .....................................................69 (2) The fiduciary duties of municipal councillors: the case law...............................................................................................70 iii (A) The distinction between public law and private law..........73 (B) Municipal councillors and their constituents ....................81 (C) Municipal councillors and municipal councils..................88 (3) Whether the relationship between town councillors and Town Councils gives rise to fiduciary duties..............................94 (4) Whether the volunteer status of appointed members changes their position................................................................101 Did Ms How Weng Fan and Mr Danny Loh owe AHTC fiduciary duties? ....................................................................................................103 The duties owed by the defendants to AHTC..........................................110 THE WAIVER OF TENDER AND APPOINTMENT OF FMSS PURSUANT TO THE FIRST MA CONTRACT IN 2011 ..............................................................112 Was the replacement of CPG with FMSS a contingency plan or a fait accompli?.........................................................................................115 Was the waiver of the tender justified in the circumstances? ................126 What were the actual reasons for the waiver of tender?........................133 The manner in which the waiver was effected without the involvement of CPG/Mr
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2Nd REPLY by MS GRACE FU, SENIOR MINISTER of STATE for NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT and EDUCATION, on DELIVERING a STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION
    FY 2011 COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY DEBATE: 2nd REPLY BY MS GRACE FU, SENIOR MINISTER OF STATE FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATION, ON DELIVERING A STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION 1. Sir, allow me to address specific issues raised by members, and elaborate on two key areas: (i) First, our efforts to create a student-centric learning environment; and; (iii) Second, providing more support for students with special needs. (I) SUBSTANTIVE AND INNOVATIVE INVESTMENTS TO DELIVER A STUDENT- CENTRIC EDUCATION Enhanced School Infrastructure to Support Holistic Education 2. Mrs Josephine Teo and Mdm Halimah Yacob asked for an update on the Primary Education Review and Implementation Committee’s (or PERI) recommendations. We are upgrading 40 more Primary schools in Phase 3. This will facilitate primary schools to transit to single session and allow strengthening of non- academic aspects of education like PE, Art and Music. 3. These upgraded schools will have newer and better facilities to support more innovative and engaging lessons. Allow me to cite a few examples. 4. The first slide shows a PE lesson at Hougang Primary School. To support a more holistic education, indoor sports halls such as this will allow PE lessons and CCAs to be conducted throughout the day, rain or shine. All schools that need it will be equipped with synthetic turf, which is cheaper to maintain and can be used immediately after it rains. 5. For the Performing and Visual Arts, schools will have band rooms, dance studios, and performing arts studios. Here we see a Performing Arts Studio at Lianhua Primary, which is integrated into the library to maximise the use of space.
    [Show full text]
  • Votes and Proceedings of the Thirteenth Parliament of Singapore
    VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTEENTH PARLIAMENT OF SINGAPORE First Session FRIDAY, 29 JANUARY 2016 No. 6 1.30 pm 1 PRESENT: Mdm SPEAKER (Mdm HALIMAH YACOB (Marsiling-Yew Tee)). Mr AMRIN AMIN (Sembawang), Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs. Mr ANG HIN KEE (Ang Mo Kio). Mr ANG WEI NENG (Jurong). Mr BAEY YAM KENG (Tampines), Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth. Miss CHERYL CHAN WEI LING (Fengshan). Mr CHAN CHUN SING (Tanjong Pagar), Minister, Prime Minister's Office and Government Whip. Mr CHEE HONG TAT (Bishan-Toa Payoh), Minister of State, Ministry of Communications and Information and Ministry of Health. Miss CHENG LI HUI (Tampines). Dr CHIA SHI-LU (Tanjong Pagar). Mr CHARLES CHONG (Punggol East), Deputy Speaker. Mr CHONG KEE HIONG (Bishan-Toa Payoh). Mr DESMOND CHOO (Tampines). Mr DARRYL DAVID (Ang Mo Kio). Mr CHRISTOPHER DE SOUZA (Holland-Bukit Timah). Assoc Prof FATIMAH LATEEF (Marine Parade). Mr CEDRIC FOO CHEE KENG (Pioneer). No. 6 29 JANUARY 2016 2 Ms FOO MEE HAR (West Coast). Ms GRACE FU HAI YIEN (Yuhua), Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Leader of the House. Mr GAN KIM YONG (Chua Chu Kang), Minister for Health. Mr GAN THIAM POH (Ang Mo Kio). Mr GOH CHOK TONG (Marine Parade). Mr HENG CHEE HOW (Jalan Besar), Senior Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office. Mr HENG SWEE KEAT (Tampines), Minister for Finance. Ms INDRANEE RAJAH (Tanjong Pagar), Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Law. Dr INTAN AZURA MOKHTAR (Ang Mo Kio). Mr S ISWARAN (West Coast), Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry).
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore C of a on Consideration in Variation of Contracts.Pdf
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGCA 106 Civil Appeal No 45 of 2019 Between Ma Hongjin … Appellant And SCP Holdings Pte Ltd … Respondent In the matter of HC/Suit No 765 of 2016 Between Ma Hongjin … Plaintiff And (1) SCP Holdings Pte Ltd (2) Biomax Technologies Pte Ltd … Defendants GROUNDS OF DECISION [Contract] — [Consideration] — [Necessity] [Contract] — [Consideration] — [Failure] [Contract] — [Variation] — [Consideration] [Civil Procedure] — [Pleadings] [Civil Procedure] — [No case to answer] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................4 THE DECISION BELOW ..............................................................................7 THE PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL.............................................9 ISSUES ............................................................................................................10 OUR DECISION ............................................................................................11 ISSUE 1: THE APPLICABLE TEST UPON A SUBMISSION OF NO CASE TO ANSWER ........................................................................................................11 ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAD ADEQUATELY PLEADED THAT THE SA WAS SUPPORTED BY CONSIDERATION ...............................................16 ISSUE 3: WHETHER CL 9.3 OF THE CLA DISPENSED WITH THE NEED FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Islam in a Secular State Walid Jumblatt Abdullah Islam in a Secular State
    RELIGION AND SOCIETY IN ASIA Abdullah Islam in a Secular State a Secular in Islam Walid Jumblatt Abdullah Islam in a Secular State Muslim Activism in Singapore Islam in a Secular State Religion and Society in Asia This series contributes cutting-edge and cross-disciplinary academic research on various forms and levels of engagement between religion and society that have developed in the regions of South Asia, East Asia, and South East Asia, in the modern period, that is, from the early 19th century until the present. The publications in this series should reflect studies of both religion in society and society in religion. This opens up a discursive horizon for a wide range of themes and phenomena: the politics of local, national and transnational religion; tension between private conviction and the institutional structures of religion; economical dimensions of religion as well as religious motives in business endeavours; issues of religion, law and legality; gender relations in religious thought and practice; representation of religion in popular culture, including the mediatisation of religion; the spatialisation and temporalisation of religion; religion, secularity, and secularism; colonial and post-colonial construction of religious identities; the politics of ritual; the sociological study of religion and the arts. Engaging these themes will involve explorations of the concepts of modernity and modernisation as well as analyses of how local traditions have been reshaped on the basis of both rejecting and accepting Western religious,
    [Show full text]
  • Major Vote Swing
    BT INFOGRAPHICS GE2015 Major vote swing Bukit Batok Sengkang West SMC SMC Sembawang Punggol East GRC SMC Hougang SMC Marsiling- Nee Soon Yew Tee GRC GRC Chua Chu Kang Ang Mo Kio Holland- GRC GRC Pasir Ris- Bukit Punggol GRC Hong Kah Timah North SMC GRC Aljunied Tampines Bishan- GRC GRC Toa Payoh East Coast GRC GRC West Coast Marine GRC Parade Tanjong Pagar GRC GRC Fengshan SMC MacPherson SMC Mountbatten SMC FOUR-MEMBER GRC Jurong GRC Potong Pasir SMC Chua Chu Kang Registered voters: 119,931; Pioneer Yuhua Bukit Panjang Radin Mas Jalan Besar total votes cast: 110,191; rejected votes: 2,949 SMC SMC SMC SMC SMC 76.89% 23.11% (84,731 votes) (25,460 votes) PEOPLE’S ACTION PARTY (83 SEATS) WORKERS’ PARTY (6 SEATS) PEOPLE’S PEOPLE’S ACTION PARTY POWER PARTY Gan Kim Yong Goh Meng Seng Low Yen Ling Lee Tze Shih SIX-MEMBER GRC Yee Chia Hsing Low Wai Choo Zaqy Mohamad Syafarin Sarif Ang Mo Kio Pasir Ris-Punggol 2011 winner: People’s Action Party (61.20%) Registered voters: 187,771; Registered voters: 187,396; total votes cast: 171,826; rejected votes: 4,887 total votes cast: 171,529; rejected votes: 5,310 East Coast Registered voters: 99,118; 78.63% 21.37% 72.89% 27.11% total votes cast: 90,528; rejected votes: 1,008 (135,115 votes) (36,711 votes) (125,021 votes) (46,508 votes) 60.73% 39.27% (54,981 votes) (35,547 votes) PEOPLE’S THE REFORM PEOPLE’S SINGAPORE ACTION PARTY PARTY ACTION PARTY DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE Ang Hin Kee Gilbert Goh J Puthucheary Abu Mohamed PEOPLE’S WORKERS’ Darryl David Jesse Loo Ng Chee Meng Arthero Lim ACTION PARTY PARTY Gan
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General
    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. Monday, 7 January 2019 Supreme Court Building, Level Basement 2, Auditorium May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Judges of Appeal, Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the Supreme Court, Introduction: AGC in Support of the Government, for the People 1 2018 was a fast-paced year for the Government and for the Attorney-General’s Chambers. The issues occupying the thoughts of Singapore’s leaders were complex and varied, with several key themes coming to the fore. These themes shaped our work over the past year, as we strove to be a strategic partner in support of the Government’s plans and initiatives, for the benefit of our country and its citizens. I will touch on three of these themes. 2 The first theme was our Smart Nation. This initiative aims to tap on the ongoing digital revolution in order to transform Singapore through technology. The Smart Nation vision is for Singapore to be a world-class leader in the field of digital innovation, resting on the triple pillars of a digital economy, digital government, and digital society. The Smart Nation revolution will play a critical part in ensuring our continued competitiveness on the world stage, powered by digital innovation. 1 3 Data sharing was and continues to be a critical aspect of this initiative. To this end, a new law was passed in 2018 which introduced a data sharing regime among different agencies in the Singapore Government. The Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018, which was drafted by our Chambers in support of this initiative, underpins and formalises a data sharing framework for the Singapore public sector.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Participating Merchants Address Postal Code Club21 3.1 Phillip Lim 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 A|X Armani Exchange
    Participating Merchants Address Postal Code Club21 3.1 Phillip Lim 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 A|X Armani Exchange 2 Orchard Turn, B1-03 ION Orchard 238801 391 Orchard Road, #B1-03/04 Ngee Ann City 238872 290 Orchard Rd, 02-13/14-16 Paragon #02-17/19 238859 2 Bayfront Avenue, B2-15/16/16A The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands 018972 Armani Junior 2 Bayfront Avenue, B1-62 018972 Bao Bao Issey Miyake 2 Orchard Turn, ION Orchard #03-24 238801 Bonpoint 583 Orchard Road, #02-11/12/13 Forum The Shopping Mall 238884 2 Bayfront Avenue, B1-61 018972 CK Calvin Klein 2 Orchard Turn, 03-09 ION Orchard 238801 290 Orchard Road, 02-33/34 Paragon 238859 2 Bayfront Avenue, 01-17A 018972 Club21 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Club21 Men 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Club21 X Play Comme 2 Bayfront Avenue, #B1-68 The Shoppes At Marina Bay Sands 018972 Des Garscons 2 Orchard Turn, #03-10 ION Orchard 238801 Comme Des Garcons 6B Orange Grove Road, Level 1 Como House 258332 Pocket Commes des Garcons 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 DKNY 290 Orchard Rd, 02-43 Paragon 238859 2 Orchard Turn, B1-03 ION Orchard 238801 Dries Van Noten 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Emporio Armani 290 Orchard Road, 01-23/24 Paragon 238859 2 Bayfront Avenue, 01-16 The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands 018972 Giorgio Armani 2 Bayfront Avenue, B1-76/77 The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands 018972 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Issey Miyake 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Marni 581 Orchard Road, Hilton Hotel 238883 Mulberry 2 Bayfront Avenue, 01-41/42 018972
    [Show full text]
  • [2020] SGCA 108 Civil Appeal No 34 of 2019 Between (1) BRS … Appellant and (1) BRQ (2) BRR … Respondents in the Matter of Or
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGCA 108 Civil Appeal No 34 of 2019 Between (1) BRS … Appellant And (1) BRQ (2) BRR … Respondents In the matter of Originating Summons No 770 of 2018 Between (1) BRS … Plaintiff And (1) BRQ (2) BRR … Defendants Civil Appeal No 35 of 2019 Between (1) BRQ (2) BRR … Appellants And (1) BRS … Respondent In the matter of Originating Summons No 512 of 2018 Between (1) BRQ (2) BRR … Plaintiffs And (1) BRS (2) BRT … Defendants JUDGMENT [Arbitration] — [Award] — [Recourse against award] — [Setting aside] — [Whether three-month time limit extended by request for correction] [Arbitration] — [Award] — [Recourse against award] — [Setting aside] — [Breach of natural justice] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND FACTS ................................................................................2 THE PARTIES ...................................................................................................3 THE SPA.........................................................................................................3 THE BULK POWER TRANSMISSION AGREEMENT .............................................6 DELAYS IN THE PROJECT AND COST OVERRUN ...............................................6 THE ARBITRATION...........................................................................................7 Relief sought...............................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore's New Home-Grown Legal Team Li Xueying 639 Words 16 April 2008 Straits Times English (C) 2008 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
    Prime News Singapore's new home-grown legal team Li Xueying 639 words 16 April 2008 Straits Times English (c) 2008 Singapore Press Holdings Limited Law Minister, Chief Justice, Attorney-General and Solicitor-General are all from NUS A NEW generation of leaders is taking the helm in the legal field, and they have one thing in common: they went to the law school here. They are: incoming Law Minister K. Shanmugam, Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, Attorney-General Walter Woon and Solicitor-General Koh Kuat Jong. All four were home-groomed at the National University of Singapore, or the University of Singapore as it was known in earlier years. This common feature was highlighted by Mr Shanmugam yesterday in a wide-ranging interview with The Straits Times, his first since the announcement of his Cabinet appointments earlier this month. Giving his take on it, he said: 'To some extent, it would mean a good understanding of the local legal scene, legal training and development.' They also would have benefited from being involved in local law for many years, he added. Mr Shanmugam himself would have clocked 23 years as a top litigator here, by the time he takes over the Law Ministry mantle from Professor S. Jayakumar on May 1. On what will be the hallmark of the new slate of legal leadership - 'exciting and interesting' was how he put it - he said: 'Each person brings a different skill set to the table.' CJ Chan, 71, appointed two years ago, was a 'doyen' among corporate practitioners while Prof Woon, 52, who became the Attorney-General last Friday, is 'exceptionally bright' and has experience as a diplomat.
    [Show full text]
  • The Candidates
    BT INFOGRAPHICS GE2015 The candidates Bukit Batok Sengkang West SMC SMC Sembawang Punggol East GRC SMC Hougang Marsiling- SMC Yew Tee GRC Nee Soon GRC Chua Chu Kang AngAng Mo MoKio Kio Holland- Pasir Ris- GRC GRCGRC Bukit Punggol GRC Timah Hong Kah GRC North SMC Tampines Bishan- Aljunied GRC Toa Payoh GRC East Coast GRC Jurong GRC GRC West Coast GRC Marine Parade Tanjong Pagar GRC GRC Fengshan SMC FOUR-MEMBER GRC Jalan Besar Chua Chu Kang MacPherson SMC GRC (Estimated no. of electors: 119,848) Mountbatten SMC PEOPLE’S PEOPLE’S ACTION PARTY POWER PARTY Gan Kim Yong Goh Meng Seng Low Yen Ling Lee Tze Shih Pioneer Yuhua Bukit Panjang Radin Mas Potong Yee Chia Hsing Low Wai Choo SMC SMC SMC SMC Pasir SMC Zaqy Mohamad Syafarin Sarif East Coast SIX-MEMBER GRC FIVE-MEMBER GRC FOUR-MEMBER GRC SINGLE-MEMBER CONSTITUENCY (SMC) (Estimated no. electors: 99,015) PEOPLE’S WORKERS’ SIX-MEMBER GRC FIVE-MEMBER GRC ACTION PARTY PARTY Jessica Tan Daniel Goh Ang Mo Kio Aljunied Nee Soon Lee Yi Shyan Gerald Giam (Estimated no. of electors: 187,652) (Estimated no. of electors: 148,024) (Estimated no. of electors: 132,200) Lim Swee Say Leon Perera Maliki Bin Osman Fairoz Shariff PEOPLE’S THE REFORM WORKERS’ PEOPLE’S PEOPLE’S WORKERS’ Holland-Bukit Timah ACTION PARTY PARTY PARTY ACTION PARTY ACTION PARTY PARTY (Estimated no. of electors: 104,397) Ang Hin Kee Gilbert Goh Chen Show Mao Chua Eng Leong Henry Kwek Cheryl Denise Loh Darryl David Jesse Loo Low Thia Kiang K Muralidharan Pillai K Shanmugam Gurmit Singh Gan Thiam Poh M Ravi Faisal Abdul Manap Shamsul Kamar Lee Bee Wah Kenneth Foo Intan Azura Mokhtar Osman Sulaiman Pritam Singh Victor Lye Louis Ng Luke Koh PEOPLE’S SINGAPORE ACTION PARTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY Koh Poh Koon Roy Ngerng Sylvia Lim Yeo Guat Kwang Faishal Ibrahim Ron Tan Christopher De Souza Chee Soon Juan Lee Hsien Loong Siva Chandran Liang Eng Hwa Chong Wai Fung Bishan-Toa Payoh Sembawang Sim Ann Paul Ananth Tambyah Pasir Ris-Punggol (Estimated no.
    [Show full text]