our
learned CSJ said LEE's ignored the common law
.Lee'd said
state that the decisions in other common law jurisdictions are
decisions borne of the special circumstances in England, Australia
and New Zealand and which have no relevance in
Singapore.
2.Even sg is a common law system,Why Sg need follow rulings
not
so good?Sg find jury system is a joke then
sg scrap.This is very simple.Sg has not followed some established
rulings
and this is not the first time.
3.i dunt keen on ranking.
sg has been ranked so high for so many years.u should take a look
and think
if sg is really so bad.
Sg was higher than US and UK etc for
so many years.
4..Do some home works
lah.?
www.singaporelaw.sg/,
Articles on Spore law,
Legal Topics,
Chapter 1-- The Singapore Legal System
by Eugene Tan
Assistant Professor, Department of Law
Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management
University
Gary Chan
Assistant Professor, Department of Law
Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management
University
The Development of an Autochthonous Legal System
1.2.28 In the 1970s and 1980s, there was an implicit casual comfort
with the inherited traditions, practices and laws of England. The
drive to create an autochthonous legal system gained increased
momentum in the late 1980s and accelerated with the appointment of
the current Chief Justice Yong Pung How in September 1990. This
coincided with the period of intensive constitutional remaking to
develop an autochthonous government and parliamentary system of
Singapore. The departure from the Westminster-inspired
parliamentary system was evident through the innovations, which
attempted to handle the unique political circumstances
here....
1.2.31 11 July 1994: The landmark Practice Statement on Judicial
Precedent declared that the Privy Council, Singapores predecessor
courts, as well as the Court of Appeals prior decisions no longer
bound the permanent Court of Appeal. The Practice Statement
reasoned that [t]he development of our law should reflect these
changes [that political, social and economic circumstances have
changed enormously since Singapores independence] and the
fundamental values of Singapore society. Increasing confidence in
the growing maturity and international standing of Singapores
legal system as well as the concern that Britains increasing links
with the European Union would render English law incompatible with
local developments and aspirations gave impetus to the legal
autochthony effort....
SECTION 3 COMMON LAW IN SINGAPORE
The Doctrine of Judicial Precedent
1.3.2 In essence, the common law system of Singapore is
characterised by the doctrine of judicial precedent (or stare
decisis). According to this doctrine, the body of law is created
incrementally by judges via the application of legal principles to
the facts of particular cases. In this regard, the judges are only
required to apply the ratio decidendi (or the operative reason for
the decision) of the higher court within the same hierarchy. Thus,
in Singapore, the ratio decidendi found in the decisions of the
Singapore Court of Appeal are strictly binding on the Singapore
High Court, the District Court and the Magistrates Court.
The court decisions from England and other Commonwealth
jurisdictions are, on the other hand, not strictly binding on
Singapore. Other judicial statements (obiter dicta) made by the
higher court in the judgment which do not directly affect the
outcome of the case may be disregarded by the lower
court.
1.3.6 Two recent examples shall suffice at this juncture as a
manifestation of Singapores desire to develop an autochthonous
legal system and body of laws. In the law of torts, the Singapore
courts have consciously deviated from the exclusionary rule
in the English case of Murphy v Brentford District Council (1991)
so as to allow recovery for pure economic losses arising from
negligent acts or omissions based on Anns v Merton (197 8 )
. More recently, in the law of contract, the Singapore
Court of Appeal in Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd
(2005) has chosen not to adopt the position in the English Court of
Appeal decision in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris
Salvage (International) Ltd (2002) on equitys
jurisdiction in the case of unilateral mistake. This need for the
autochthony of Singapore law is further driven by the European
Union legal developments and their impact on the British
system.
5.so Spore do not change the law now just to fix CSJ.
Sg has deviated for long time from common law,scrap jury
system,
not follow case law so blindly etc.There are few famous cases
deviated
from common laws.Pl share here.
CSJ should not look himself so high that sg need to change
the rules of game to fix him.
search'' common law cases + singapore''
6.i would be sad and suprised if qualified lawyer wrote
the article in SDP site.a first year law student should
know sg law has deviated from common law for some time.
But judging form the format of the article,it seems it
was written by a' learned' lawyer.
7.Why Sg was higher than US and UK etc for
so many years.
