This article provides a discussion of the Spycatcher litigation in England and Australia and also attempts to highlight the grey areas in the law of confidence and to discuss the extent of clarification brought about by the case. Copyright issues are also dealt with.

Does a letter of comfort constitute a promise enforceable against its issuer or is its effect confined to the creation of a moral rather than a legal obligation? This question arises in modern trade mainly because businessmen frequently fail to reach a consensus in their bargains about the nature of the letter of comfort to be issued as collateral. The object of this article is to compare the answers given to the question in English and Australian cases with the solution provided in civil law countries.

The High Court of Singapore has decided that a female transsexual who undergoes a sex change operation to become a man has no capacity to marry under the Women's Charter. This controversial decision leads one to ask whether the law of nullity is in need of reform. The article critiques the decision and suggests the view that post-operative transsexuals do have the capacity to marry in their new sex. It also discusses other problems in the law of nullity and suggests improvements.

An increasing number of credit and charge cards are issued every year. It has been reported that there are currently 1.01 million cards in circulation (Business Times, 12 October 1992) in Singapore. Is a credit or charge card transaction one of money lending? If so, does it fall within the Moneylender's Act? Would card issuers be in breach of the Act if they are not registered as moneylenders under the Act? These issues are considered in this article. The topic of moneylending is also examined. It is argued that the Moneylender's Act is an archaic legislation that needs review. In this review, it is suggested that the part of the UK Crowther Report on Consumer Credit which recommended that a new and comprehensive regime be introduced to replace the present piece-meal approach be seriously considered.

This article examines the law of murder under the Penal Code of Singapore. It looks at the law in a comparative and historical context. It argues that the definition of murder is based on a fine balance between objective and subjective factors and that this balance should not be upset by the courts. It questions the more frequent resort that is being made to section 300(c) in the drafting of charges for murder.

This article examines the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, and considers the prospects for its future role in tort law in the light of two recent decisions, one by the House of Lords in England, and one by the High Court of Australia, both of which suggest that its continued existence as a separate tort cannot be justified.

In 1994, a difference of opinion arose between the President and the Government on whether the President had the power, under Article 22H(1) of the Constitution, to veto a Bill to amend Article 22H(1). The Constitution was amended to establish a Tribunal to which any question as to the effect of a constitutional provision on any Bill could be referred for its opinion. In the first reference heard on 17 March 1995, the Tribunal advised that the President had no power under Article 22H(1) to veto a Bill to amend Article 22H(1) itself. The Tribunal's position as well as the case for the Government was strongly criticized in an article published in the December 1995 issue of this journal. This article is a reply to those criticisms.

This article examines the source, nature and scope of the inherent powers of the court, as well as the relationship between these powers and the court's procedural mechanism. It has often been the view that the inherent jurisdiction of the English court is applicable in Singapore without qualification. This assumption must be considered in the light of the jurisdictional developments which have occurred since the 1960's. The article also focuses on the willingness of the court to use its inherent powers to ensure a fair and effective process of litigation, and the justification of such a role in the absence, or even in the face, of statutory provision.

Fiduciary law now covers a wide range of situations, in the commercial as well as the property areas, that are far removed from its origin in the law of express trusteeship. It is feared for its uncertainty of application, which is in part due to the generalizations in which the law that governs conflict of duty and interest on the part of trustees is couched. A different approach is needed for the variety of fiduciaries which exist in the modern law. It is necessary that the response of fiduciary law to situations which it is dealing with must be proportionate. It will also be suggested that the parties are able to regulate and limit their obligations under it through the law of contract.

The various tests for determining whether matter is defamatory are discussed, with the writer pointing out that the "ridiculous light" test has the potential to stifle caricature and satirical writing. The writer then argues that the standard by which the defamatory quality of matter is judged in culturally diverse countries should not be that of the community as a whole, but could equally be that of a respectable minority. Finally, the writer discuses the shift in community attitudes towards sexist advertising, extra-marital relationships, homosexuality and lesbianism, abortion and communism, and the consequences of any such shift for the law of defamation.