The recent enforcement action taken by the Monetary Authority of Singapore ("MAS") against three employees of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation ("GIC") is the first publicized case in Singapore involving cross border insider trading under the Securities and Futures Act. The present article looks at the impact of the new insider trading provisions on enforcement across borders, and more substantially, the apparent Singapore legal position on corporate liability for insider trading by corporate agents. While the three GIC employees were made to pay civil penalties, the MAS took the position that GIC itself was not liable because its senior executives were unaware of the transactions. One implication is that a corporation is legally entitled to keep the fruits of its agents' unlawful activity. Such a result was, fortunately, avoided in the GIC case by the corporation volunteering to turn over its gains to the MAS. The author argues that a more purposive and holistic reading of the statutory provisions permits a wider interpretation, one that would result in a more coherent law on insider trading. Even if the narrow position is the right one to adopt, the untenable consequence prompts legislative amendments to reverse the position. The author argues first for necessary clarification in the law on corporate liability for insider trading. Second, he argues for rules to conduce corporations toward taking robust safeguards against insider trading by its employees. Third, he argues for a distinct rule to deprive corporations of the fruits of unlawful activity, this notwithstanding the fact that the employee was on a frolic of his won and that the corporation is not blameworthy.

A common thread underlying many clinical legal education initiatives – to support access-to-justice imperatives – is interwoven with broader policy initiatives within a legal system to develop its pro bono legal service channels for the benefit of the wider community. The former can make meaningful contributions towards the pursuit of the latter, while the flourishing of the latter can create valuable opportunities for the growth of the former. This article explores the potential for a closer alignment between the pro bono activities of Community Legal Clinics and the development of clinical legal education initiatives within Singapore’s law schools, analysing empirical data from the author’s experience volunteering at a legal clinic alongside undergraduate law students to formulate recommendations that may generate desired outcomes on both fronts.

In the context of intelligent finance, the traditional legal framework targeting financial professionals is impractical and ineffective for robo-advisors do not possess independent legal personality, thereby leading to problems of empty enforcement, confusion concerning the identity of obligors and the failure of the existing system of duties. To deal with this dilemma, lawmakers need to restructure the obligor's identification mechanism and the system of duties. The substance of duties for the mode of robo-advisor needs to penetrate the complex veil and keep up with the algorithmic level to reflect their essential characteristics. The principles for the new regulatory paradigm are to avoid the evasion of accountabilities and responsibilities caused by dodging and relaxing the duties with the excuse of algorithm black box, as well as to avoid overburdening obligors by fully embracing the new development of artificial intelligence.