On Monday (22 April), Senior Minister of State for Law and Health Edwin Tong said that a new appellate court may be established to assist the current Court of Appeal with its caseload as it has increased by more than 50 per cent in the last five years.

In order to curb this problem, Mr Tong said that the Supreme Court must be restructured and the government is looking at its options.

The total number of civil and criminal cases brought to the Court of Appeal shot up by 56 per cent to 490 last year, compared to only 314 cases 2013, as Singapore positions itself as an international hub for dispute resolution services, the Minister explained.

Although initiatives like increasing the number of High Court judges sit on the Court of Appeal and up the number of sitting days have been implemented in the interim, a “more permanent” solution is needed, noted Mr Tong during his keynote speech at the two-day Litigation Conference organised by the Law Society of Singapore.

As such, many options are being studied by the Ministry of Law in order to permit appeals from High Court to be shared between two appellate courts and for judges to sit in the new court.

However, the Court of Appeal will still remain as the apex court of the land where it will main look at cases that most likely to have “substantial consequences” to individuals or society, issue the Court of Appeal’s control and oversight of lower courts and tribunals, as well as concern the general administration of justice like things relating to the Constitution, criminal matters, contempt of court and the Singapore International Commercial Court.

Apart from this, other appeals from the High Court will be heard by the appellate court, Mr Tong said. But, he noted that a mechanism will look at appeals that do not fit under these categories but satisfy other criteria, to be heard by the Court of Appeal directly, without giving much explanation on it.

Nonetheless, further appeals to the Court of Appeal by cases heard by the new appellate court can also be allowed, under strict requirements in order to emphasise “the fact that the matter has already been considered by appellate court”.

“A further appeal to the Court of Appeal should therefore only be permitted for deserving matters, for example where the appeal raises an arguable point of law of general public importance,” said Mr Tong, adding that more details will be explained in the near future.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

若确认国家安全、经济受威胁 陈如斯:总统有权宣布紧急状态

新加坡前进党秘书长陈清木早前建议,若本届政府期限到期疫情仍持续,可考虑由总统组织临时政府,直至疫情结束才召开选举。 对此,国务资政兼国家安全统筹部长张志贤昨日(25日)在国会反驳上述建议,并指尽管在面对疫情危机当儿召开选举并不理想,但展延大选至超过规定的期限也有违宪法。 他声称这类建议“有误导性且无助现况”,他指经过咨询总检察长意见后,后者认为推迟选举至规定的期限是违宪的。 张志贤强调,只有在宣布紧急状态下,才能展延选举。“尽管我国也曾渡过许多危机,不过自我国独立以来,从未展延政府任期超过宪法的规定以外。” 不过,国人为先党党魁陈如斯同样引述新加坡宪法反驳张志贤,指宪法也赋予总统,若确认局势确实危及国家安全、经济和百姓生计,总统有权发布紧急状态。 他认为,眼下冠状病毒19,已威胁到国人的经济和生活。若疫情拖沓至明年4月仍未消散,有理由可宣布紧急状态并展延选举。 陈如斯曾在2011年,与陈清木医生、陈钦亮和陈庆炎博士等人竞选总统。 陈如斯早前在接受本社专访时曾表示,在疫情危机下若召开选举,政府等同把自身利益摆在国人性命健康之上,是“不负责任的”。 他呼吁政府当前应全力抗疫,反对党也会和政府“同仇敌忾”。但是现在选举反而会分散国人的注意力,无法团结国人力量共同抗疫。 在宪法第150条下,国会依据紧急状态下的合理理据,可制定相关法律,与此同时也可展延选举。 若紧急状态结束,所有在紧急状态下制定的法律即作废,意味着那只是为协助国家渡过紧急情况下的临时措施。

Hyflux claims government gave instructions for company to “prepare for 8 million population”

During the election campaigning in GE 2020, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee…

Ric O’Barry: We can save the planet by controlling our desires

~by: Elisabelle Aruldoss~ ACRES hosted an open dialogue session with influential dolphin activist,…

Protest against public transport fare increase

By Tiffany Gwee Photography by Jeremy Chan A group of approximately 400…