DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report 2013 Bridging Connectingideas People

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Bridging ConnectingIdeas People annual report 2013 Bridging ConnectingIdeas People Elgin Bridge is used as a metaphor in the Elgin Bridge, which is a stone’s throw from 2013 Annual Report to represent our focus on the Law Society’s office, is a vehicular and communication and outreach to members. pedestrian bridge across the Singapore River, linking both North and South Bridge Road. Bridges connect people and places and enable the passage of ideas. Bridges open up The existing bridge was completed in 1929 opportunities for communities to be helped, and named after Lord Elgin, Governor-General they reduce isolation and bring of India (1862-1863). As this was the first society together. bridge spanning the river, the two roads leading to it were accordingly named North Bridge Road and South Bridge Road. Elgin Bridge is also known as thih tiau kio in the Hokkien dialect, meaning “iron suspension bridge”. In 2008, Elgin Bridge was marked for conservation as part of the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s expanded conservation programme, reflecting its prominence in Singapore’s history and heritage. our people Our Mission 5 The Council 6 The Executive Committee 7 Council Report 8 The Secretariat 10 President’s Message 11 CEO’s Report 15 Treasurer’s Report 18 Audit Committee Report 21 Year in Review 22 Statistics 31 pro bono services Pro Bono, Learning and Support Services 35 Community Legal Clinics 44 Criminal Legal Aid Scheme 54 contents Law Awareness 56 Project Law Help 58 growing our practice Advocacy 63 Alternative Dispute Resolution 64 Civil Practice 66 Continuing Professional Development 68 Conveyancing Practice 70 Corporate Practice 72 Criminal Practice 73 Family Law Practice 75 Information Technology 77 Insolvency Practice 78 Intellectual Property 80 1 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 growing our practice International Relations 82 Muslim Law Practice 84 NIMA-PIMA 85 Probate Practice 86 Publications 88 Public and International Law 90 Small Law Firms 91 Social and Welfare 92 Solicitors’ Accounts Rules 94 Sports 96 Young Lawyers 98 enhancing professional standards Admissions 103 Anti-Money Laundering 105 Ethics 106 Inquiries into Inadequate Professional Services 107 contents Report of the Inquiry Panel 108 serving the community Compensation Fund 117 Professional Indemnity 118 acknowledgements 123 auditor’s report pages in grey The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 2 our people 3 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 4 our mission To serve our members and the community by sustaining a competent and independent Bar which upholds the rule of law and ensures access to justice. 5 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 the council 17 8 9 18 19 20 11 15 10 12 13 16 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Seated: 1Young Chee Foong, 2Kelvin Wong (Treasurer), 3Leo Cheng Suan (Vice-President), 4Lok Vi Ming, SC (President), 5Thio Shen Yi, SC (Vice-President), 6Wong Meng Meng, SC (Immediate Past President), 7Lim Seng Siew Standing: 8Anand Nalachandran, 9Tan Joon Liang Josephus, 10Tan Gim Hai Adrian, 11See Chern Yang, 12Simran Kaur Toor, 13Eng Yaag Ngee Rachel, 14Tang Bik Kwan Hazel, 15Lisa Sam Hui Min, 16Gregory Vijayendran, 17Kenneth See, 18Michael S. Chia, 19Sean Francois La’Brooy, 20Lee Terk Yang Not in main picture: Kuah Boon Theng Moiz Haider Sithawalla The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 6 the executive committee 4 5 6 1 2 3 Seated: 1Leo Cheng Suan, 2Lok Vi Ming, SC, 3Thio Shen Yi, SC Standing: 4Anand Nalachandran, 5Kelvin Wong, 6Lim Seng Siew Not in main picture: Kuah Boon Theng 7 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 council report Outgoing Council Members for 2012 Council Meetings The term of the following Council members ended on There were 4 ordinary meetings and 1 special meeting 31 December 2012: of the Council from September 2012 to December 2012. The attendance of members was as follows: Rajan Menon Koh Theng Jer Christopher Kang Yixian Member Present Absent Council Members for the Period 1 Wong Meng Meng, SC 5 0 January 2013 to 31 December 2013 (President) Lok Vi Ming, SC 4 1 Senior Category (not less than 12 years’ standing) (Vice-President) Lok Vi Ming, SC (President) Leo Cheng Suan 4 1 Leo Cheng Suan (Vice-President) (Vice-President) Thio Shen Yi, SC (Vice-President) Kelvin Wong (Treasurer) 1 4 Kelvin Wong (Treasurer) Wong Meng Meng, SC (Immediate Past President) Rajan Menon 3 2 Young Chee Foong Young Chee Foong 5 0 Lim Seng Siew (Executive Committee Member) Lim Seng Siew 4 1 Kuah Boon Theng (Executive Committee Member) Eng Yaag Ngee Rachel Kuah Boon Theng 5 0 Tan Gim Hai Adrian Eng Yaag Ngee Rachel 2 3 Gregory Vijayendran Ganesamoorthy Thio Shen Yi, SC 4 1 Lisa Sam Hui Min Michael S. Chia Lisa Sam Hui Min 3 2 Michael S. Chia 3 2 Middle Category (7 to 12 years’ standing) Moiz Haider Sithawalla 2 3 Moiz Haider Sithawalla Anand Nalachandran (Executive Committee Member) Koh Theng Jer Christopher 1 4 Sean Francois La’Brooy Anand Nalachandran 4 1 Lee Terk Yang See Chern Yang Sean Francois La’Brooy 1 4 Lee Terk Yang 1 4 Junior Category (less than 7 years’ standing) Ong Pang Yew Shannon 1 4 Tang Bik Kwan Hazel Tan Joon Liang Josephus Tang Bik Kwan Hazel 3 2 Simran Kaur Toor Kang Yixian 2 3 Kenneth See (from 18 February 2013) Simran Kaur Toor 3 2 The following members of Council for 2013 are Statutory Members nominated by the Minister for Law to serve on the Council: Thio Shen Yi, SC Kelvin Wong Eng Yaag Ngee Rachel The following members of Council for 2013 are Statutory Members nominated by Council to serve on the Council: Lim Seng Siew Kuah Boon Theng Michael S. Chia annual report 2013 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 8 There were 8 ordinary meetings and 1 special meeting of the Council from January 2013 to August 2013. The attendance of members was as follows: Member Present Absent Lok Vi Ming, SC (President) 8 1 Leo Cheng Suan (Vice-President) 8 1 Thio Shen Yi, SC (Vice-President) 6 3 Kelvin Wong (Treasurer) 7 2 Wong Meng Meng, SC (Immediate Past President) 4 5 Young Chee Foong 9 0 Lim Seng Siew 9 0 Kuah Boon Theng 9 0 Eng Yaag Ngee Rachel 2 7 Tan Gim Hai Adrian 8 1 Gregory Vijayendran Ganesamoorthy 8 1 Lisa Sam Hui Min 8 1 Michael S. Chia 6 3 Moiz Haider Sithawalla 4 5 Anand Nalachandran 8 1 Sean Francois La’Brooy 4 5 Lee Terk Yang 2 7 See Chern Yang 6 3 Tang Bik Kwan Hazel 6 3 Tan Joon Liang Josephus 8 1 Simran Kaur Toor 4 5 Kenneth See (from 18 February 2013; not yet appointed to 5 2 Council in the January and February meetings) 9 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 the secretariat 10 7 2 17 5 16 15 3 12 14 13 8 4 1 11 6 9 Not in picture Chief Executive Officer Communications & 1Tan Su-Yin Membership Interests Compliance 12Shawn Toh, Director, Department Head 2Kenneth Goh, Director, Department Head 3 Continuing Professional Kevin Wang, Assistant Director Development Conduct 13Jean Wong, Assistant Director, Department Head 4Ambika Rajendram, Director, Department Head 5K Gopalan, Director Finance 14Jasmine Liew, Director, Department Head Representation & Law Reform 15Clifford Hang, Senior Assistant Director 6Michelle Woodworth Cordeiro, Director, Department Head Information Technology 16Michael Ho, Director, Department Head Pro Bono Services 7Lim Tanguy Yuteck, Director, Department Head Publications 8Nadine Yap, Director 17Sharmaine Lau, Director, Department Head 9Shahrany Binte Hassan, Director 10Vimala Chandrarajan Khan, Director 11Babara Seet, Assistantannual Director report 2013 The Law Society of Singapore • Annual Report 2013 10 president’s message The Family Expands In my speech at the Opening of the Legal Year 2013, I noted that the number of local lawyers holding practising certificates had exceeded 4,000 for the first time in 2012. This contrasted rather sharply in percentage terms with the 1,579 local lawyers when I joined practice in 1987. The increase in numbers over the last 26 years was, however, neither uniform nor quite as spectacular as the percentage figures appear to suggest. Although the number of lawyers doubled over the next 10 years to 3,243 in 1997, it was to take another 15 years before the profession would see a net increase of 800 local lawyers in its ranks. In fact, the profession only added a net number of 176 local lawyers in the 10 years between 1997 and 2007. This contrasts sharply against the dramatic growth of the profession in the last 2 years. In 2012, a total of 457 local lawyers joined the profession, and in 2013, the number stands at 479 at the time of this Message. The increase in numbers in the last couple of weeks is unprecedented. The local Bar has never been this big and is testament to the popularity of the law course, the high standing of the profession and the robust health of Singapore’s economy. The increase shows no sign of abating. With the second law school at SMU now at full stride, the profession can expect about 450 new entrants to the profession each year, not including graduates from the law courses of 35 approved overseas universities. And of course there is also the third law school coming on stream in a few years. The legal family has certainly grown. And we are still growing. We need now to build on the strong foundations our predecessors laid for us and continue to equip our members with new skills to make sure everyone continues to be relevant in the evolving economy in the years ahead and to make the Law Society and our members even more resilient, not just to survive but to succeed in an increasingly complex society.
Recommended publications
  • [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han

    [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han

    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGCA 16 Civil Appeal No 99 of 2019 Between Wham Kwok Han Jolovan … Appellant And The Attorney-General … Respondent Civil Appeal No 108 of 2019 Between Tan Liang Joo John … Appellant And The Attorney-General … Respondent Civil Appeal No 109 of 2019 Between The Attorney-General … Appellant And Wham Kwok Han Jolovan … Respondent Civil Appeal No 110 of 2019 Between The Attorney-General … Appellant And Tan Liang Joo John … Respondent In the matter of Originating Summons No 510 of 2018 Between The Attorney-General And Wham Kwok Han Jolovan In the matter of Originating Summons No 537 of 2018 Between The Attorney-General And Tan Liang Joo John ii JUDGMENT [Contempt of Court] — [Scandalising the court] [Contempt of Court] — [Sentencing] iii This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. Wham Kwok Han Jolovan v Attorney-General and other appeals [2020] SGCA 16 Court of Appeal — Civil Appeals Nos 99, 108, 109 and 110 of 2019 Sundaresh Menon CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, Judith Prakash JA, Tay Yong Kwang JA and Steven Chong JA 22 January 2020 16 March 2020 Judgment reserved. Sundaresh Menon CJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction 1 These appeals arise out of HC/OS 510/2018 (“OS 510”) and HC/OS 537/2018 (“OS 537”), which were initiated by the Attorney-General (“the AG”) to punish Mr Wham Kwok Han Jolovan (“Wham”) and Mr Tan Liang Joo John (“Tan”) respectively for contempt by scandalising the court (“scandalising contempt”) under s 3(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016 (Act 19 of 2016) (“the AJPA”).
  • 7. Civil Procedure

    7. Civil Procedure

    (2008) 9 SAL Ann Rev Civil Procedure 143 7. CIVIL PROCEDURE Cavinder BULL SC MA (Oxford), LLM (Harvard); Barrister (Gray’s Inn), Attorney-at-Law (New York State); Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore). Jeffrey PINSLER SC LLB (Liverpool), LLM (Cambridge), LLD (Liverpool); Barrister (Middle Temple), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore. Appeals Leave to appeal 7.1 In Blenwel Agencies Pte Ltd v Tan Lee King [2008] 2 SLR 529, the Court of Appeal held that where the High Court has refused leave to appeal against a decision of the District Court, there can be no further recourse after the High Court has adjudicated on the matter. This case was an extension of the Court of Appeal’s previous judgment in SBS Transit Ltd v Koh Swee Ann [2004] 3 SLR 365, which concerned an application for leave to appeal against the decision of a Magistrate’s Court. 7.2 Andrew Phang JA reiterated the fundamental principle that where a legal decision cannot be appealed against as of right but requires express permission from a named authority before it can be appealed against, the decision of that authority as to whether or not to grant leave to appeal is final (Blenwel Agencies Pte Ltd v Tan Lee King [2008] 2 SLR 529 at [14]). It is clear from s 21(1) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed) that the High Court is the authority with the final say as to whether to grant or refuse leave to appeal against a decision of the Subordinate Courts.
  • Minlaw) Invited Applications for the Second Round of Qualifying Foreign Law Practice (QFLP) Licences on 1 July 2012

    Minlaw) Invited Applications for the Second Round of Qualifying Foreign Law Practice (QFLP) Licences on 1 July 2012

    PRESS RELEASE AWARD OF THE SECOND ROUND OF QUALIFYING FOREIGN LAW PRACTICE LICENCES The Ministry of Law (MinLaw) invited applications for the second round of Qualifying Foreign Law Practice (QFLP) licences on 1 July 2012. Twenty-three applications were received by the closing date of 31 August 2012. 2 QFLP licences will be awarded to the following four firms (listed in alphabetical order): Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher; Jones Day; Linklaters, and Sidley Austin. 3 The firms will have up to six months from 1 April 2013 to commence their operations as QFLPs, and their licences will be valid for an initial period of five years from the respective start dates. Background 4 The QFLP scheme was introduced in 2008 following the recommendations of the Committee to Develop the Legal Sector chaired by Justice V K Rajah. The Committee, which included senior lawyers from top local firms, assessed that local firms and local lawyers would benefit from the increased foreign presence and competition over time. 5 The QFLP licences allow Foreign Law Practices (FLPs) to practise in permitted areas of Singapore law1. The scheme seeks to support the growth of key economic sectors, grow the legal sector, as well as to offer additional 1 Permitted areas are all areas except domestic areas of litigation and general practice, for example, criminal law, retail conveyancing, family law and administrative law. The QFLPs can practise the permitted areas through Singapore-qualified lawyers with practising certificates or foreign lawyers holding the foreign practitioner certificate. 1 opportunities for our lawyers. A total of six FLPs2 were awarded QFLP licences in the first round in 2008.
  • Ramesh S/O Krishnan V AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd

    Ramesh S/O Krishnan V AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd

    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2016] SGCA 47 Civil Appeal No 112 of 2015 Between RAMESH S/O KRISHNAN … Appellant And AXA LIFE INSURANCE SINGAPORE PTE LTD … Respondent In the matter of Suit No 1022 of 2012 Between RAMESH S/O KRISHNAN … Plaintiff And AXA LIFE INSURANCE SINGAPORE PTE LTD … Defendant JUDGMENT [Tort]—[Negligence]—[Breach of duty] [Tort]—[Negligence]—[Causation] This judgment is subject to final editorial corrections approved by the court and/or redaction pursuant to the publisher’s duty in compliance with the law, for publication in LawNet and/or the Singapore Law Reports. Ramesh s/o Krishnan v AXA Life Insurance Singapore Pte Ltd [2016] SGCA 47 Court of Appeal — Civil Appeal No 112 of 2015 Sundaresh Menon CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA and Steven Chong J 25 November 2015 27 July 2016 Judgment reserved. Sundaresh Menon CJ (delivering the judgment of the court): Introduction 1 Employers often require potential hirees to provide references from their former employers. Such references may serve as a basis for the prospective employer to assess the applicant’s character and abilities, and will likely have at least some, if not significant, bearing on the applicant’s chances of obtaining employment. For this and other reasons, which we will elaborate upon in the course of this judgment, it is important that employers prepare such references, when called upon to do so, in a fair and accurate manner to avoid unjustifiably prejudicing the former employee’s prospects of obtaining fresh employment. Before us, it was accepted that an employer has a duty of care when preparing such a reference.
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING OF THE LEGAL YEAR 2021 Speech by Attorney-General, Mr Lucien Wong, S.C. 11 January 2021 May it please Your Honours, Chief Justice, Justices of the Court of Appeal, Judges of the Appellate Division, Judges and Judicial Commissioners, Introduction 1. The past year has been an extremely trying one for the country, and no less for my Chambers. It has been a real test of our fortitude, our commitment to defend and advance Singapore’s interests, and our ability to adapt to unforeseen difficulties brought about by the COVID-19 virus. I am very proud of the good work my Chambers has done over the past year, which I will share with you in the course of my speech. I also acknowledge that the past year has shown that we have some room to grow and improve. I will outline the measures we have undertaken as an institution to address issues which we faced and ensure that we meet the highest standards of excellence, fairness and integrity in the years to come. 2. My speech this morning is in three parts. First, I will talk about the critical legal support which we provided to the Government throughout the COVID-19 crisis. Second, I will discuss some initiatives we have embarked on to future-proof the organisation and to deal with the challenges which we faced this past year, including digitalisation and workforce changes. Finally, I will share my reflections about the role we play in the criminal justice system and what I consider to be our grave and solemn duty as prosecutors.
  • Annual Report 2019 | 3 About the Academy

    Annual Report 2019 | 3 About the Academy

    ANNUAL REPORT ACADEMY OF MEDICINE 2019 SINGAPORE Committed to specialist education and training since 1957 CONTENT ACADEMY OF MEDICINE, SINGAPORE The Academy 1 Master’s Message 2 The 2019-2020 Council 5 The Academy 5 Representation at Ministry of Health and Related Organisations 6 Year in Review 2019 7 Finance and Establishment Review Committee Events 8 Dinner & Dialogue with Senior Minister of State (Health) 9 AMS Chinese New Year Celebration 9 Formation of the Chapter of Pain Medicine Physicians 10 Induction Comitia 2019 10 Public Forum 2019 Sponsorships, Grants and Awards 11 Awards 11 Visiting Academicians 12 Visiting Lecturers 12 Travel Assistance 12 Letters of Support Deanery 13 In-Training Examinations 14 Diploma in Hospital Medicine 14 Mandatory Geriatric Medicine Modular Course 14 Master of Health Professionals Education, Singapore (MHPE-S) 14 2019 Intake (Unit One) and 2018 Intake (Unit Seven) 15 Self Learning Module (SLM) 15 CPD Bulletin 15 AMS Fellowship Training Programme 16 MOH Contract of Services for Healthcare Services 16 Dental Specialist Accreditation Assessment 16 Staff Registrar Scheme Office of Professional Affairs 18 Guidelines, Advisories & Consensus Committee (GACC) 21 Ad-Hoc OPA Activity – PDPA Awareness Talk 2019 21 Medical Experts Committee (MEC) 23 Faculty of Medical Experts (FME) Standing Committees 24 Membership 25 Joint Committee on Specialist Training 26 Publications Past Masters and Honorary Fellows List Our People 30 Staff List Finance Statements for the Financial Year Ended December 2019 COLLEGES AND
  • 4. Arbitration

    4. Arbitration

    (2012) 13 SAL Ann Rev Arbitration 59 4. ARBITRATION Lawrence BOO LLB (University of Singapore), LLM (National University of Singapore); FSIArb, FCIArb, FAMINZ, Chartered Arbitrator; Solicitor (England and Wales), Advocate and Solicitor (Singapore); Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore; Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, Bond University (Australia); Visiting Professor, School of Law, Wuhan University (China). Recourse against awards – Domestic arbitration Institutional rules operating as “exclusion agreement” 4.1 An arbitral award made under the Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 2002 Rev Ed) (“AA”) may be appealed against on a question of law, upon notice to the other parties and to the arbitral tribunal. Such a right may nevertheless be excluded by agreement of the parties. The mere declaration by the parties that the award is intended to be “final and binding” is not of itself sufficient to constitute such an agreement: see Holland Leedon Pte Ltd v Metalform Asia Pte Ltd [2011] 1 SLR 517 at [5]. Adoption of the institutional rules which excludes an appeal to court without specific reservation has the effect of an exclusion agreement: Halsbury’s Laws of Singapore vol 1(2) (Singapore: LexisNexis, 2011 Reissue) at para 20.126. 4.2 In Daimler South East Asia Pte Ltd v Front Row Investment Holdings (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2012] 4 SLR 837, the parties entered into a joint venture agreement which provides for all disputes arising out of the said agreement to be finally settled under the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) Rules of Arbitration 1998. Disputes arose and the plaintiff commenced arbitration to which the defendant lodged a counterclaim.
  • OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General

    OPENING of the LEGAL YEAR 2019 Speech by Attorney-General

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

    Grounds of Decision

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE [2020] SGHC 208 Originating Summons No 980 of 2018 Between Republic of India … Plaintiff And Vedanta Resources plc … Defendant GROUNDS OF DECISION [Arbitration] — [Confidentiality] — [Documents] [Arbitration] — [Confidentiality] — [Evidence used in other proceedings] [Arbitration] — [Interlocutory order or direction] — [Court’s power] [Arbitration] — [Arbitral tribunal] — [Competence] [Arbitration] — [Conduct of arbitration] — [Preliminary issues] [Arbitration] — [Declaratory relief] TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND FACTS ................................................................................4 THE CAIRN GROUP RESTRUCTURING...............................................................4 INDIA ISSUES ASSESSMENT ORDERS.................................................................4 COMMENCEMENT OF THE ARBITRATIONS ........................................................5 THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS ISSUE PROCEDURAL ORDERS ................................6 Cairn Arbitration Procedural Order No. 10..............................................7 Vedanta Arbitration Procedural Order No. 3............................................9 Vedanta Arbitration Procedural Order No. 6..........................................10 Vedanta Arbitration Procedural Order No. 7..........................................11 THE PRELIMINARY QUESTION .............................................................12
  • Michael Green QC, Fountain Court

    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.
  • The Janus-Faced State: an Obstacle to Human Rights Lawyering in Post-Colonial Asia-Pacific

    The Janus-Faced State: an Obstacle to Human Rights Lawyering in Post-Colonial Asia-Pacific

    Title: THE JANUS-FACED STATE: AN OBSTACLE TO HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERING IN POST-COLONIAL ASIA-PACIFIC Author: Shreyas NARLA Uploaded: 20 September 2019 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of LAWASIA or its members. THE JANUS-FACED STATE: AN OBSTACLE TO HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERING IN POST-COLONIAL ASIA-PACIFIC† Shreyas Narla* Human rights lawyers now constitute an emergent vulnerable class. This is largely on account of the various causes they represent which pits them in opposition to forces of oppression. Such a fault-line and the consequent fallouts can be traced to the historicity and prevalent patterns of governance and administration in a given State, particularly in the postcolonial states of the Asia Pacific. These states, with their shared colonial histories and legacies, have had many conflicting interests to balance and remedy, and yet are confronted with the realities of their multiple stories of oppression and human rights violations of the lawyers challenging them. Human rights lawyers belonging to these states assume a special role and responsibility as they endure much risk in order to course-correct such actions. While non- state actors and private citizens can be brought to book for violations under prevalent laws, the complexity lies where the State itself is the oppressor instead of being the facilitator. The legal impunity that guards such State- sponsored oppression plays a severe deterrent to their lawyering and requires attention, both in terms of data analyses and reformative policy. I. INTRODUCTION The modern State, meant to be a benign protector of the rights of its citizens, is also the harshest oppressor that uses several instrumentalities at its disposal to control and regulate their actions.
  • SAL Annual Report 2017

    SAL Annual Report 2017

    An nu al R ep or t 2017/18 ears of Sharing and Creating Value The SAL Story 03 An interview with The President 06 SAL 30th Anniversary Celebration 08 SAL Senate 10 SAL Executive Board 12 SAL Key Executives 14 Organisational Structure 15 Key Statistics 16 Setting new precedents for Singapore Law 17 Financial Statements 35 SAL ANNUAL THE 02 REPORT 2017/18 SAL STORY 03 THE SAL STORY The Singapore Academy of Law Bill was Our Vision passed in 1988. It was said to be a giant step forward; lawyers will have a forum Singapore — for sharing ideas, SAL will not only help to promote a sense of belonging amongst The Legal hub of Asia members of the legal profession, but also raise the standard of legal services in Singapore. At least 1,700 people were Our Mission expected to be members, including judges, practising lawyers, legal service officers, Driving legal excellence lecturers in the university’s law faculty and law students. through thought leadership, Modelled after the Inns of Court in London, SAL provided dining facilities world-class infrastructure in City Hall to enable the Chief Justice and judges to get together over lunches and solutions and dinners with members of the legal fraternity for closer rapport. At the first Senate meeting held on 19 January 1989, with the late CJ Wee Chong Jin as President, eight Committees were appointed to carry out the functions of SAL. None had full-time staff. It was nevertheless a promising start. The first issue of the Singapore Academy of Law Journal was published in December 1989 and in the following year, SAL organised its first major conference to discuss “Legal Services in the 1990s”.