Singapore Journal of Legal Studies NUS
   
 
SEARCH  ARCHIVE
Browse/Advanced Search
 
Home
The Singapore Journal of Legal Studies is the flagship law journal of the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore and one of the oldest law journals in the Commonwealth. As the first and leading legal journal in Singapore, it contains a rich store of legal literature analysing the legal, political and social development of Singapore in its progression from a developing to a First World nation. The journal continues to advance the boundaries of global and local developments in law, policy and legal practice by publishing cogent and timely articles, legislation comments and case notes on a biannual basis.  

Highlights of our March 2017 issue are …

In Digging Deep into the Ownership of Underground Space—Recent Changes in Respect of Subterranean Land Use, Elaine Chew outlines and evaluates the amendments to the law on subterranean land use, which represent a significant departure from the pre-existing law. She concludes by noting that critical structural and interpretive gaps in the law remain and that more work is needed before it can truly be said that a workable legal framework for underground land use has been created.

Christian Hofmann, in Shadow Banking in Singapore, examines the phenomenon of shadow banking and assesses Singapore’s current regulatory regime and its response to the rise of non-bank financial intermediaries. He notes that the wide regulatory powers conferred on the Monetary Authority of Singapore make for a nimble and comprehensive regulatory framework, but suggests that there is value in making intervention powers explicit in the Monetary Authority of Singapore Act, rather than merely in the non-binding Code on Collective Investment Schemes.

In Advancing Constitutional Justice in Singapore: Enhancing Access and Standing in Judicial Review Cases, Swati Jhaveri analyses the role of the rules on locus standi in public law cases. Noting that the tenor of recent jurisprudence reflects a modest liberalisation of the procedural barriers to access, she further suggests that a broader notion of ‘representative’ standing is not inconsistent with the need to prevent actions by ‘busybodies’ and ensure that the courts do not become involved in free-standing political debate.

Maziar Peihani, in Financial Regulation and Disruptive Technologies: The Case of Cloud Computing in Singapore, examines the dilemma of disruptive technologies—which present both risks and opportunities—focusing in particular on cloud computing. Assessing Singapore’s regulatory approach to cloud computing, he reflects on the tension between the need to avoid undue restrictions on personal and commercial use of cloud technologies on the one hand, and safeguarding the financial system and the privacy of consumer information on the other.

In Issue Estoppel Created by Consent Judgments: Dissonance Between the Principles Underlying Settlements and Court Decisions, Dorcas Quek Anderson discusses the question of whether the concept of issue estoppel applies to consent judgments, by analysing four conflicting High Court decisions. She argues that different policy concerns apply to consent judgments, and recommends therefore that the courts use a modified test, based on an extended doctrine of res judicata which is more appropriate for consent orders.

Joshua Seet, in Attribution of Liability Between Parent and Subsidiary within a Single Economic Entity: The Singapore Experience, discusses the Competition Commission of Singapore’s approach of attributing liability downwards from a parent company to its subsidiary. He argues that while such a development allows for a more effective enforcement of competition laws, the limits on attribution deserve greater clarification in the interests of legal certainty.

In The Trust Statutory Exception to Indefeasibility in the Singapore Torrens System, Teo Keang Sood argues for the inclusion of constructive trusts as a statutory exception to indefeasibility in the Land Titles Act (“LTA”). He notes that constructive trusts are already recognised in the LTA, albeit indirectly, and urges reconsideration of the Court of Appeal decision in United Overseas Bank Ltd v Bebe bte Mohammed [2006] 4 SLR (R) 884. He further argues that recognising constructive trusts as a statutory exception does not go against the policy objectives of the Singapore Torrens system.

Benjamin Wong YongQuan, in Object Restrictions in Singapore Competition Law, discusses recent developments in the law on object restrictions in Singapore. While noting that the flexibility of the ‘object limb’ makes indeterminacy at the penumbra inevitable, he recommends three proposals for development which would render the law more internally coherent and systematic.

Our March 2017 issue also features several legislation comments and case notes, and book reviews. Click here for the complete contents page.

 



SJLS accepts submissions on a rolling basis and publishes 2 issues a year in March and September.

sjls lcolumn sjls lcolumn

sjls rcolumn sjls rcolumn sjls rcolumn sjls rcolumn