COMMERCIAL LAW
KHE-LCD-SGD-00341 4
So, the problems with interpreting statues is that judges have to decide what parliament meant
by a particular piece of legislation, and they do this by generally applying certain rules or
canons. These canons are not hard and fast rules but a mixture of common-sense
presumptions about the law, as well as legal techniques in giving full effect to the words under
consideration. The four general approaches are:
1) The Literal Rule
This approach assumes that the intention of Parliament can be found in the statute itself
in that the words are read in their plain and ordinary meaning. However, when there is
ambiguity, adoption of this rule may lead to absurd results, i.e. the sale and/or purchase
of drugs are illegal in Singapore (absurdity; prescription drugs are not illegal). Thus, only
where the words clearly unambiguously state the intention of Parliament can the Literal
Rule be used.
2) The Golden Rule
The general principal underlying the Golden Rule is that a statute must be construed to
avoid manifest absurdity or contradiction with itself. See the case below.
In re Sigsworth (1935)
The Golden Rule was applied to prevent a murderer from inheriting an estate on the intestacy
of his victim although he was (as her son) her only heir (Literal Rule here clearly could not be
applied).
3) The Mischief Rule (also known as the Purposive Approach)
Known sometimes as the Rule in Heydon’s Case (1584), the Mischief Rule considers the
state of the law before the enactment (statute) in question and the “mischief” (or defect)
which Parliament intended to cure with the enactment or amendment. See the case below.
In Gardiner v Sevenoaks (1950)
The purpose of the Act was to provide for the safe storage of inflammable material wherever
it might be stored on “premises”. Notice was served on the Plaintiff who stored such material
in a cave to comply with safety rules. The Plaintiff argued that “premises” did not include a
cave. The court, in applying the Mischief Rule held that “premises” included the cave,
considering the intention of the Act (enactment).
The canons are not used exclusively. No judge will adopt one particular approach. Depending
on the facts of the case before him and the words with which he has to interpret, the judge
may adopt on or a combination of the three canons.
COMMERCIAL LAW
KHE-LCD-SGD-00341 5
The canons include the following rules (or maxims of interpretation) which assist the courts in
determining the meaning of particular words. These are:
The Ejusdem Generic Rule: Where specific words are followed by general words, it will be
presumed that the general words cover only the same kinds of things specifically mentioned.
For example, “traffic signs and other devices” were held in Evans v Cross (1938) to mean all
signals, warning sign posts, direction posts and not the white line on the road since all the
specific devices referred to were more in the nature of signs seen at eye level or higher.
The Noscitur a Sociis rule: Doubtful words are interpreted by looking at the other words which
they are associated with. For example: “public places” will take on a different meaning when
read with “parks and recreational spaces” than “government buildings.
The Expressio unius est exclusion alterius rule: An express mention of one thing impliedly
excludes anything else. So, a statutory rule on domestic animals would exclude wild animals
and other sea wild life.
The Court System in Singapore
The Chief Justice, who is appointed by the President, is the head of the Judiciary.
The Judiciary is made up of the Supreme Court and the State Courts.
The Supreme Court hears both civil and criminal matters and is separated into the Court of
Appeal and the High Court.
The State Courts consist of District Courts and the Magistrates’ Courts.
A Senior District Judge overlooks the State Courts.
The Supreme Court
▪ The Court of Appeal
As its name suggests, the Court of Appeal hears appeals from the decisions of the High
Court in both civil and criminal matters. It is the Chief Justice and Judges of Appeal who
sit in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal is usually made up of three judges (the
Chief Justice and two Judges of Appeal). However, on certain occasions there may be
less than or more than three judges.
COMMERCIAL LAW
KHE-LCD-SGD-00341 6
▪ The High Court
It is the Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court (which can in certain instances
include a Judge of Appeal or subject matter experts to provide assistance in certain
cases) who comprise the High Court. Normally all proceedings are heard before a
single judge.
The High Court hears both criminal and civil cases, as well as appeals from the
decisions of District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts. In addition, it hears proceedings
concerning admiralty matters, company winding-up, bankruptcy and applications for the
admission of advocates and solicitors.
The High Court has general supervisory and revisionary jurisdiction over all State
Courts in any civil or criminal matter. In general, the High Court deals with matters
where the value of the subject matter of the claim exceeds $250,000. It has jurisdiction
to try all offences committed in Singapore and in certain cases, try offences committed
outside Singapore as well. The High Court tries criminal cases whose punishment
involves the death penalty or more than 10 years of imprisonment.
The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) is a division of the High
Court designed to deal with transnational commercial disputes. Established on 5
January 2015, this court has the jurisdiction to hear and try an action if:
o the claim in the action is of an international and commercial nature;
o the parties to the action have submitted to the SICC’s jurisdiction under a
written jurisdiction agreement; and
o the parties to the action do not seek any relief in the form of, or connected with,
a prerogative order (including a mandatory order, a prohibiting order, a
quashing order or an order for review of detention).
The SICC may also hear cases which are transferred from the High Court.
The State Courts
Originally called the Subordinate Courts, they were renamed “State Courts” on 7 March 2014. The State Courts comprise the District and Magistrate Courts — both of which oversee civil
and criminal matters that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Over 90% of
all judicial cases in Singapore are heard in the State Courts.
District judges and magistrates are appointed by the President of the Republic of Singapore
upon the recommendation of the Chief Justice.
Appeals against decisions in the State Courts are made to the Supreme Court.
COMMERCIAL LAW
KHE-LCD-SGD-00341 7
• District Court
Civil cases involving claims of between $60,000 and $250,000, or up to $500,000 for
road traffic accident claims or claims for personal injuries arising out of industrial
accidents. For criminal matters, the District Court hear cases where the maximum
imprisonment term does not exceed 10 years, or which are punishable with a fine only.
• Magistrates Courts
Civil cases involving claims not exceeding $60,000 are dealt with by the Magistrates
Court. For criminal matters, Magistrates’ Courts hear cases where the maximum
imprisonment term does not exceed 5 years, or which are punishable with a fine only.
• Specialised Courts
Apart from the District and Magistrate Courts, the State Court system has the following
specialised courts:
o Coroner’s Court: This court holds inquiries to ascertain the cause of a
person’s death and determines if anyone is criminally responsible where the
death results from unnatural causes.
o Community Court: This court deal with cases such as offenders with mental
disabilities, animal abusers, and cases that affect race relations.
o Family Justice Courts: These courts, which comprise the Family Division of
the High Court, the Family Courts and the Youth Courts, deal with matters such
as divorce, family violence, adoption and guardianship cases, youth cases and
probate matters.
o Syariah Court: This court administers and resolves marriage and divorce
disputes between parties who have married under the provisions of Muslim
Law.
o Community Justice and Tribunals System: This venue generally hears
matters on employment claims and issues, community disputes, harassment
cases, and small claims.
o Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal: This tribunal hears cases
involving disputes between neighbours.
o Small Claims Tribunal: This tribunal deals with resolution of small claims
between consumers and suppliers, contracts arising from the sale of goods or
provision of services, and lease of residential premises not exceeding 2 years.
o Copyright Tribunal: This tribunal deals with disputes between copyright
owners and the users of that copyrighted material.
COMMERCIAL LAW
KHE-LCD-SGD-00341 8
o The Employment Claims Tribunal: This tribunal provides employees and
employers with a speedy and low-cost forum to resolve their salary-related
disputes and wrongful dismissal disputes.
o Traffic Court: As its name suggests, this court hears matters on traffic offences
and related offences.
Methods for Resolving Business Disputes Going to Court can be an expensive as well as time-consuming process, depending on the
parties’ course of action. We now examine the alternative methods to going to court to resolve
disputes.
The State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution (SCCDR) was established in March 2015.
This centre employs a judge-led Court Dispute Resolution (CDR) process to ensure that cases
in the State Courts are managed effectively. It also conducts mediation, neutral evaluation,
conciliation and arbitration to facilitate the resolution of civil matters without the need for a
trial. These methods are also less costly methods of resolving disputes. These methods,
however, do not apply to criminal cases.
• Mediation is a structured, interactive process where an impartial third-party will assist
disputing parties in resolving conflict through the use of specialized communication
and negotiation techniques. All participants in mediation are encouraged to actively
participate in the process. Mediation is a “party-centred” process in that it is focused
primarily upon the needs, rights, and interests of the parties.
• Neutral Evaluation is conducted by an unbiased third party, such as a former judge
or senior counsel, known as an “evaluator” who will review the case and provide an
early assessment of the merits of the case. The parties, with their respective lawyers,
will present their case and the key evidence to this evaluator, who will then provide his
best estimate of the parties’ likelihood of success at trial.
• Conciliation is a court dispute resolution process for parties in a case to resolve their
dispute without going for a trial in Court. It allows each party to seek guidance from the
Judge during the conciliation session to come up with an optimal settlement for all
parties.
• Arbitration is a process where parties agree to resolve the dispute by bringing the
matter before a neutral third party, i.e. an arbitrator, for decision. During an arbitration
hearing, both parties, with their respective lawyers, will present their case to the
arbitrator, who, after hearing all the parties, will come to a decision. This decision by
the arbitrator is legally binding even if one or both of the parties does not agree with it.