The earlier decision of the Malaysian Federal Court in Adorna Properties Sdn. Bhd. V. Boonsom Boonyanit @ Sun Yok Eng had not only spawned academic articles on the subject of indefeasibility of title and interests under the National Land Code 19654 ("the NLC") but had, unfortunately, also left an unwanted trail of uncertainty and insecurity of title for landowners which the Torrens system of land registration embodied in the NLC seeks to avoid, not to mention the slew of conflicting decisions pronounced in its aftermath.

The similar fact rule in Singapore - as with the law on any evidence law doctrine that can be found in both our Evidence Act and the common law - has required clarification for some time. This note, which discusses the latest local decision on the similar fact rule, considers if that decision is compatible with the Evidence Act and the various conceptualisations underlying the doctrine.

The judicial approach towards constitutional interpretation, in attributing meaning to words in the constitutional text, illumines judicial self-understanding of institutional competence, howthe separation of powers animates or constrains judicial review, and where the fount of judicial legitimacy lies.