1.2.1 From the founding of the British East India Company by Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles in 1819 until its independence in 1965, Singapore`s legal development was closely linked to its British colonial master. Often, English legal traditions, customs, jurisprudence and legislation were adopted, with little regard for whether they corresponded to local conditions. Measures to restrict appeals to the Privy Council were first taken in 1989. This year, the Act was amended[74] so that appeals to the Privy Council in a civil case are admissible only if all parties have agreed to such an appeal before the Court of Appeal hears the case. In criminal matters, an appeal to the Privy Council can only be lodged in the case of the death penalty and if the judges of the Court of Appeal for criminal matters do not decide unanimously. These changes came shortly after the Privy Council reinstated a prominent opposition MP, Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, on the roster of lawyers and advocates of the Supreme Court of Singapore after he was removed from an affidavit for a criminal conviction for making false statements; The court called the conviction a « grave injustice. » [75] In 1993, the previous establishment of a separate Court of Appeal and a Criminal Court of Appeal was abolished and replaced by a single Court of Appeal for civil and criminal appeals. [76] Appellate judges appointed to the Court of Appeal were no longer required to deal with the work of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice sat as President of the Court of Appeal. The creation of the Permanent Court of Appeal paved the way for the abolition of all appeals to the Privy Council effective April 8, 1994. [77] Subsequently, the Court of Appeal issued a practice notice dated July 11, 1994 indicating that, while the Court would consider its own previous decisions and those of the Privy Council to be normally binding: however, it would consider itself free if it appeared that the enforcement of such decisions would « cause injustice in a particular case or impede the development of the law in accordance with Singapore`s situation », It would consider itself free to depart from those decisions. This power is exercised sparingly, taking into account the risk of subsequent disruption of contractual, property and other legal rights.
[78] Today, Singapore`s Court of Appeal is the highest court in the country. 1.8.7 There are various instruments for the creation of law firms and cooperation alliances between law firms. In addition to former sole proprietorships and partnerships, the Bar Association, with the associated benefits of limited liability and limited liability partnerships, was also established in the legal profession. Singaporean law firms have the right to employ foreign lawyers who are suitably qualified to practice law according to certain criteria, including appropriate qualifications, expertise and experience, as well as the legal practice areas of the lawyer and law firm. The Singapore Mediation Centre (SMC) is a non-profit organisation that trains and selects a panel of neutral mediators who can help parties resolve disputes peacefully. Mediators are excellent legal and other professional staff who, with the help of each party`s lawyer, help the parties negotiate and find a practical solution acceptable to all. The decision is made by the parties and the mediator only assists them; He does not choose her. 90% of completed cases are resolved by SMC within one business day, and it is reported that it has saved significant time and money. Referral fees start at SGD 900 per party per day.
The DMC also conducts a neutral assessment if necessary (objective opinion of an industry expert if the parties are at an impasse in negotiations). In 1823 Raffles issued regulations for the administration of the island. Regulation III of 20 January 1823 established a judiciary responsible for « all descriptions of persons flying the British flag ». The magistrates were instructed « to follow the course of the British judiciary so far as local circumstances permit the avoidance as far as possible of technical details and unnecessary forms and to discharge the duties of their office with temperament and discretion to the best of their judgment and conviction and the principles of substantial justice ». Raffles` regulations were most likely illegal, as he acted beyond the scope of his statutory powers when he passed them – although he had the power to place the Singapore factory under Bencoolen`s jurisdiction, he was not vested with the power to place the entire island under Bencoolen`s control. In this regard, he had treated Singapore as if the whole island had been ceded to the British, although the treaty with the sultan and the Temenggung only allowed for the establishment of a commercial factory. [1] While most consider Singapore a country subject to rules, calling it a « beautiful city » (with hefty fines for garbage, chewing gum, smoking in public, walking and not flushing toilets after use, etc.), it is also considered by many to be a very safe country to live and do business. Singapore has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. As a former British colony, Singapore`s legal system is based on English common law. All Singaporeans are equal before the law without distinction as to race, religion or belief.
Singaporean law is based on four pillars: the constitution, legislation, subsidiary legislation and judicial decisions. These are explained below: 1.8.4 Qualified foreign lawyers may apply to the Attorney General for a Foreign Practitioner`s Certificate to practise in limited areas of Singaporean law such as banking and finance, mergers and acquisitions, and intellectual property law, provided that the Foreign Practitioner Examinations (FPE) are successful. A prerequisite for participation in the EPF is that the foreign lawyer must have at least three years of relevant legal practice or work in Singapore or overseas. Queen`s Counsel of the United Kingdom may be admitted on an ad hoc basis in a particular case, provided that the court is satisfied that this is sufficiently difficult and complex. Despite the dubious legal status of the courts established by Raffles and Crawfurd in Singapore, they suggest that the de facto position was that English legal principles applied to Singapore between 1819 and 1826. [4] The independent status of Singapore`s legal system was underscored by the repeal of section 5 of the Civil Law Act (see above) on 12 November 1993 by the application of English law 1993. [79] The purpose of the Act is to clarify the scope of application of English law in Singapore.