Although there are no reported local decisions considering the effect that an assured's suicide has on a claim under his life policy, the prevailing assumption is the local position is no different from the English position prior to the Suicide Act 1961 (which resulted in suicide no longer being an offence in England). According to this approach, the claim would be barred on a contractual level because the assured cannot be the author of his own loss, and on a broader level, because the law will not allow him to benefit from his own criminal acts. This paper examines the question of whether this approach can be applied in toto in Singapore. It will be argued that the Beresford approach may not be appropriate in the local legislative framework and cultural background.