"When a person acts in an unconscionable way towards another, how should a court, in seeking to achieve 'practical justice', balance and reconcile values of certainty, consistency arising from precedent, overall coherence in the structure of the law, deference to to Parliament on policy issues, and the provision of a remedy appropriate to reverse or prevent harm to the innocent party?"

Securitisation, which involved shifting assets off balance sheets, inadvertently led to the creation of even greater risks that were packaged into toxic instruments that brought down a number of large financial institutions. In Singapore, however, the risks of the U.S. housing market collapse and consequent mortgage and financial institution default were largely moved out of the banking sector and sold to the public. In that sense, corporate/securities laws fulfilled the purpose of disintermediation. But while these insulated Singapore banks, the losses were largely borne by investors, whose confidence in the securities market has been eroded. The article discusses the legal and regulatory changes that have been made in response to the crisis, and suggests further trends and reforms dealing with its aftermath from financial and economic perspectives.

Singapore competition law prohibits agreements that have as their object the restriction of competition. Recent developments, both in Singapore and abroad, have had a significant impact on this aspect of competition law. This article discusses the law on object restrictions in Singapore in light of these recent developments, and offers three recommendations on the same.

Just at the point where the unconscionability exception to the autonomy principle pertaining to letters of credit and demand guarantees appears to have finally emerged fully developed, the Singapore Court of Appeal has recognised the right of parties to contractually limit the range of causes of action available where the parties enter into a dispute. Finding such contractual terms enforceable has now taken the unconscionability exception almost entirely out of play and simultaneously shifted the power balance to the beneficiary while making the letter of credit product more attractive to rational buyers. The effect of the new 'Asplenium Clause' is yet to be fully seen but this paper concludes that in the immediate term, boilerplate clauses will be entered into every contract of sale that requires a guarantee to be provided, thereby virtually eliminating unconscionability as a grounds for enjoining against abusive calls on independent guarantees.

This paper analyses Cambodia's proposed new criminal procedure laws in relation to trials in absentia. Cambodia has always allowed trials in absentia, since its colonial days, but it is argued that recent developments in other states and in international law and practice limiting trials in absentia should be followed in Cambodia. It is argued that trials in absentia in Cambodia are likely to infringe upon the human rights of Cambodian citizens, and that they are prima facie no longer acceptable to the international community unless strict requirements are adhered to. The government of Cambodia should take into account international law, as well as its own Constitution and treaty obligations, when deciding whether the continuation of trials in absentia are appropriate for the country. The paper also analyzes potential conflicts between Cambodia's criminal procedure law and the international standards that must apply to Cambodia's special court to try former Khmer Rogue leaders, the Extraordinary Chambers. The repercussions of this conflict are discussed.

This paper argues for an ASEAN convention to streamline the enforcement and recognition of foreign judgements within the region. Presently, the countries within ASEAN have different rules relating to the enforcement and recognition of foreign judgements. To standardise these different procedures, the author suggests that an ASEAN convention, modelled generally after the 1968 Brussels Convention and the 1971 Hague Conventions, be established. On arbitral awards, the author believes that a convention would not be necessary if all the member states of ASEAN become signatories of the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards.

In recent times, many mainland Chinese are taking up employment or immigration opportunities outside China. With the accumulation of personal wealth in China, more of such movement of human capital can be expected. However, at the same time, the Chinese tax authorities are increas- ing their attempts to enforce Chinese law on Chinese working outside mainland China by requiring them to report overseas income and comply with China’s Individual Income Tax Law. The threat of “double taxation” will inevitably affect the decisions of those who are looking for overseas employ- ment opportunities and those who are currently working abroad. This article examines the tax con- sequences of both outbound and inbound cross-border employment from China’s perspective. By comparing the income tax rules applicable to different groups of cross-border employees, the article will highlight the discriminatory treatment of Chinese cross-border employees and propose mea- sures to better facilitate the cross-border movement of human resources.

Globalisation of the world's securities markets requires an appropriate legal and regulatory response. Territorial oriented regulatory systems must be replaced by a regular regime which provides the necessary legal infrastructure to support the development of a truly global securities market. Focussing on mandatory disclosure rules, this paper contends that harmonisation of regulatory standards at an international level is imperative, and in so doing identifies the pitfalls with the regulatory competition theory. International harmonisation of securities regulation has already gathered momentum, and this welcome development will also be considered. Finally, the difficulties inherent in the process of harmonisation will be recognised together with suggestions as to how to overcome them.

Singapore's courts have long refused to adopt proportionality review in constitutional adjudication. However, their instinct to reject proportionality, while possibly well-founded, has yet to be thoroughly tested. This article forwards three arguments for proportionality's use in Singaporean constitutional adjudication. First, as a matter of precedent, proportionality's four enquiries are already latent in Singapore's constitutional jurisprudence. Second, as a matter of principle, Singapore's courts have the constitutional authority to adopt proportionality as a ground of constitutional review and are not institutionally incompetent to answer its enquiries. Third, on grounds of policy, proportionality is desirable because it helps ensure the cogency and rationality of legislative or executive acts within Singapore's burgeoning political culture of justification. By making a case for proportionality in precedent, principle and policy, this article hopes to initiate a considered discussion on whether and, if so, to what extent proportionality should be used in Singaporean constitutional adjudication.