Collective bargaining is an integral aspect of industrial relationship in Singapore. The precise scope of the restrictions placed on certain classess of employees to collective bargaining have been a subject of prolonged discussion between unions and employers. This article examines the Ministry of Labour 1992 Guidelines on union eligibility in light of relevant awards by the Industrial Arbitration Court with particular emphasis on the eligibility of middle level employees to join and participate in rank-and-file union activities.

Judicial and legal institutions in Asia, in general and Singapore, in particular, have come under criticism on the ground that they are not independent from the government of the day. This article explores the problems involved in assessing the value of such a critique: the open-endedness of the idea of independence itself (which in real life is a matter of degree), empirical difficulties in demonstrating that these institutions have indeed succumbed to improper government pressure, and the need to distinguish between institutional independence (as determined by constitutional agreements) and actual independence (as demonstrated by the decisions made in particular cases).

This article outlines the present land system in the People's Republic of China. It explains the difference between land ownership and land use rights. It also discusses problems related to land use rights over state-owned land.

Any lawyer who knows anything about the law relating to insurance will be familiar with the concept of insurable interest. In England, this requirement, in the context of general insurance, is imposed by the Life Insurance Act 1774. The provisions which relate to insurable interest do not just reproduce he English position. There are material differences between the English and the local positions. It is the aim of this article to explore the possible implications of these differences and to attempt to make suggestions as to the local legal position.

Bankruptcy processes are an integral part of any financial system; they provide an escape path for people burdened by problem debt, whilst also allowing businesses some level of clarity on the recovery of sums unpaid. Bankruptcy does however have a number of significant and longterm consequences for the debtor, and creditors are unlikely to have their accounts repaid in full. There has therefore been an increasing focus on the development of bankruptcy alternatives-allowing individuals to be released from debts without the strict processes and consequences of formal bankruptcy, whilst also maximising the returns to creditors. In Singapore, a wide variety of bankruptcy alternatives have developed, and indebted individuals can now make an educated choice based on their personal situation. This article analyses the different bankruptcy alternatives in Singapore, highlighting the benefits and detriments of the processes available and outlining some potential reforms to provide a comprehensive and accessible regime.

In Part I of this two-part article, the scope of the best evidence rule, both as it is understood at common law and as it is embodied in the Evidence Act, is clarified. Detailed consideration is particularly given to one of the expressions of the best evidence rule, namely, section 93. Part II will continue with a discussion of the inherent limitations in section 93 as opposed to its exceptions which are set out in section 94. The contention and demonstration that the Evidence Act is deficient in the treatment of mechanical, electrical and electronic recordings of relevant facts completes Part II.

The concept of 'distinctiveness' in the Singapore Trade Marks Act 1999 plays a very important role as gate-keeper of what should be entered unto the trade mark register. For this reason, there must be proper understanding of how the statutory provisions on distinctiveness work. The aim of this article is to unravel the knots in these provisions, and to propose a construction of these provisions that furthers the policy underlying the distinctiveness requirement - namely, publici juris.

It is easy to think of the corroboration rules as a thing of the past – something which in a few years will no longer plague the law of evidence. Yet we must not forget the apparently intractable problem which they were designed to deal with – that of oath against oath, one person's word against another. Both historically and presently, the law has had to struggle with a choice between a regime of rules or a system of discretion; and the result is a fascinating compound of rule and discretion.

Under Singapore's Westminster derived parliamentary government system, the President as the ceremonial head of state possessed very limited residual discretionary powers. The Constitution, incorporating British convention, requires the President to act in accordance with Cabinet advice. Come 1991, Singapore remained a dominant one party state with untrammeled power reposed in the Cabinet. By constitutional amendment, the presidency was transformed into an elective office vested with certain negatively couched discretionary powers to check the powerful parliamentary executive. This article examines the development of the institution and the major amendments which have taken place pertaining to the elected presidency since its inception. It assesses the extent to which the presidency has effectively "clipped the wings" of the government that created it. In particular, the first constitutional reference heard on March 17, 1995 under the newly created Article 100 tribunal is discussed.

This paper concerns the legal framework governing non-party access to court records in Singapore. It provides a brief comparative study of the access frameworks in Australia and the UK. From this comparative analysis, guiding principles and procedures are distilled to facilitate suggestions on how Singapore's current access regime may be reformed. Open justice and the freedom of information and expression may be fundamental principles, but they do not mandate an unquestioned right of access to judicial records as the interests of justice may be served by both disclosure and non-disclosure. Both principles must be balanced against competing considerations, such as confidentiality and the right to a fair trial. An access regime is not built on open justice alone. It must adeptly reconcile all the competing factors in a manner which best secures the proper administration of justice.