Focus on Singapore investment immigration and Singapore law:
In the 1980s and 1990s, Singapore's development in various aspects, including education, legislation, and judiciary, became relatively mature. The Singapore government gradually realized that Singapore's social environment, demographic structure, local customs, cultural practices, social needs, and various circumstances are quite different from those of the United Kingdom and its other colonies, such as India. Moreover, British judges were not very familiar with Singapore's social environment, often knowing only part of the situation, which made some British court cases unsuitable for Singapore's context. Additionally, British law was being influenced by the laws of the European Community, making it inappropriate and impractical to follow British court precedents.
The right to appeal to the Privy Council is restricted
In 1989, the Singapore Parliament legislated to limit the rights of litigants to appeal to the Privy Council, such as lawyers who were disqualified due to professional misconduct and litigants in criminal cases who were sentenced to death and where the decisions of the Singapore Court of Appeal were inconsistent. They were not allowed to appeal to the Privy Council; only when the parties to a contract stipulated in the contract that the Privy Council would be the final court for resolving contractual disputes could they appeal to the Privy Council. This legislative restriction on the right to appeal to the Privy Council was a judicial strategy that reduced the historical connection between Singapore's legal system and the Privy Council of the United Kingdom.
A permanent court of appeal for civil and criminal cases
Singapore's legal system underwent significant changes and restructuring only after Chief Justice Yong Pung How took office in the 1990s. On July 1, 1993, the Singapore Parliament passed an amendment to the Supreme Court Ordinance, abolishing the previously separate civil and criminal courts of appeal and establishing a single permanent court of appeal to hear civil and criminal appeal cases.
Application of English Law Ordinance
On November 12, 1993, Singapore enacted the Application of English Law Ordinance, which selectively specified which English laws would continue to apply in Singapore and which would be discarded. This effectively avoided the adverse consequences of "eating foreign food without digesting it."
Judicial precedent litigation procedure declaration
On January 8, 1994, the Chief Justice of Singapore announced a judicial precedent litigation procedure declaration at the opening ceremony of the new judicial year. This unprecedented declaration clearly stated:
(1) The Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Singapore, when handling civil and criminal appeal cases, will not be bound by any Privy Council decisions, regardless of whether these appeal decisions come from Singapore or other countries, and will no longer have legal binding force on the Singapore Court of Appeal;
(2) As the final court of appeal in Singapore, the Court of Appeal will also no longer be bound by any precedents it has previously established or any judgments made by courts with equivalent jurisdiction.
This declaration means that the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Singapore will be able to deviate from precedent principles in appropriate cases to pursue fairness and justice. Past precedent principles may have been correct and just at the time, but due to the rapid changes in Singapore's environment, past precedent principles may become outdated and unsuitable.
Complete severance of ties with the Privy Council
On April 8, 1994, Singapore officially severed its historical ties with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom by enacting the Abolition of the Judicial Committee Ordinance. From that day forward, the final court of appeal in Singapore's legal system became the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Singapore. Individuals engaged in maritime or financial activities in Singapore who wish to resolve disputes using foreign laws may still appoint arbitration tribunals from the United Kingdom or other countries to resolve disputes through arbitration awards.
The main result of the above reforms and legal system changes is that British court precedents no longer have legal binding force on Singapore courts but only persuasive authority for reference by Singapore courts.
Due to Singapore's history as a British colony, it inherited the rule of law system and legal framework left by the British, with independent judges publicly hearing cases and independent lawyers professionally assisting in the implementation of this legal system. This series of judicial reforms and restructuring demonstrates that Singapore's judicial institutions are capable of effectively adjusting the inherited legal system from the United Kingdom to safeguard Singapore's current social and cultural values. This has led Singapore's Attorney General to state: "Now Singapore officially has its own laws."
After the reforms and restructuring, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Singapore has, in several cases, deviated from the Privy Council and its own past precedents, truly and effectively implementing the judicial principle that it is not bound by any Privy Council decisions or any of its own past judgments.
However, unrestrained or excessive deviation from British court precedents and the precedents of the Singapore Court of Appeal may inevitably lead to a loss of confidence among litigants in Singapore courts regarding the certainty of Singapore law. Regarding this concern, on July 11, 1994, the Chief Justice of Singapore provided the following explanation in the Court of Appeal: "The Court of Appeal recognizes the important role that adherence to precedent principles plays in providing legal certainty and predictability when applied to similar cases. However, since Singapore has undergone significant changes in its political, social, and economic environment since becoming an independent and sovereign republic, the development of Singapore law must reflect these changes and the fundamental values of Singapore society. If adherence to precedent leads to injustice or constrains the development of law that aligns with Singapore's needs, the Court of Appeal will not be bound by its own or the Privy Council's precedents; therefore, the Court of Appeal will continue to maintain the general binding force of precedents but will also deviate from these precedents in appropriate cases. Since precedents have retroactive effect, the Court of Appeal will only exercise its judicial power to deviate from precedents in very exceptional circumstances."
