Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

Jurisdiction

Singapore Management University

2019

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Recovering Misdirected Trust Assets In The Face Of Torrens Indefeasibility, Alvin W. L. See Jun 2019

Recovering Misdirected Trust Assets In The Face Of Torrens Indefeasibility, Alvin W. L. See

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Where misdirected trust asset consists of, or becomes invested in,registered land, whether the beneficiary could recover it from the recipient isdoubtful given that the Torrens system, through the principle ofindefeasibility, effects a substantial reversal of the priority rules under thegeneral law. The key to unravelling the seemingly contradictory cases on thistopic is to be sensitive to the diversity in drafting and interpretation of thedifferent Torrens legislations, with particular focus on whether the principleof indefeasibility also protects registered volunteers. Through a comparative studyof the Torrens jurisdictions in Australia and Singapore, this article highlightshow the position differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and …


The Constitutionality Of Ouster Clauses: Nagaenthran A/L K Dharmalingam V Attorney-General [2018] Sghc 112, Benjamin Joshua Ong May 2019

The Constitutionality Of Ouster Clauses: Nagaenthran A/L K Dharmalingam V Attorney-General [2018] Sghc 112, Benjamin Joshua Ong

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Section 33B(4) of Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act purportedly partly ousts judicial review of the Public Prosecutor’s determination of whether a drug trafficker has substantively assisted the anti-drug enforcement agency. This paper argues that Singapore’s High Court erred in holding this provision constitutionally valid. Ouster clauses are unconstitutional vis-à-vis Articles 12(1) and 93 of the Constitution; the High Court’s view does not accord with the law on non-justiciability and is premised on a flawed theory of legislative intention. It is no answer that judicial power is subject to a ‘balance’ which renders a partial ouster clause constitutionally valid. The High …