LITT
Try LITT free
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Gobi A/L Avedian
The court held that the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA can be rebutted if the accused provides a credible account, on a balance of probabilities, that they believed the substance was something other than the controlled drug charged.
Edwin s/o Suse Nathen v Public Prosecutor [2013] SGHC 194
The court established a sentencing framework for first-time offenders under s 67(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act, categorised by alcohol concentration levels, and clarified that the absence of aggravating factors does not constitute a mitigating factor.
Zhou Tong and others v Public Prosecutor
The court affirmed that solicitors have an absolute duty to the court to act with diligence and competence, and that the court has inherent jurisdiction to order a solicitor to personally bear costs or refund fees for serious professional negligence.
Luyono Lam v Public Prosecutor
A custodial sentence is generally not called for under s 48C of the Act where the movement of cash is predicated on a legitimate business and the offender is not involved in money laundering or terrorist activities.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v BDB
The court held that deterrence is not a primary sentencing principle for crimes of passion committed in the spur of the moment, and that personality aberrations, even if not amounting to a mental disorder, can be a mitigating factor if there is a causal link to the offending cond
Phua Kong Yang v Public Prosecutor
The court reduced the custodial sentence for an offence of unlawful assembly, noting that while a custodial sentence was appropriate due to the public nature of the violence and the accused's antecedents, the lack of premeditation and the accused's role warranted a reduction.
Public Prosecutor v Vitria Depsi Wahyuni [2012] SGHC 49
The court held that an increase in the maximum statutory penalty for an offence does not necessitate a corresponding increase in the sentence imposed in every case.
Tuan Foo Pao (alias Chong Fook Pao) v Public Prosecutor [2012] SGHC 29
The court affirmed the trial judge's findings of fact regarding the appellant's disorderly conduct and assault, noting that the appellant failed to produce evidence to support his claims.
Fam Shey Yee v Public Prosecutor [2012] SGHC 134
A conviction under s 70(4)(a) of the Road Traffic Act is not to be treated as a conviction under s 67 for all purposes, but the punishment in s 67(2) applies to a s 70(4)(a) offence.
Public Prosecutor v Ang Seng Thor [2011] SGHC 134
The court held that there is no hard-edged distinction between public and private sector corruption for sentencing purposes; custodial sentences may be appropriate for private sector corruption depending on the gravity of the offence and policy considerations.
Lim Kopi Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor [2010] SGHC 4
Deterrence must be tempered by proportionality and the specific moral and legal culpability of the offender, especially when the corporate offender is the alter ego of an individual already sentenced for the same offence.
TANGARAJU S/O SUPPIAH v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
An application for permission to review a concluded appeal under s 394H of the CPC requires the applicant to show sufficient material capable of showing almost conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, which is not satisfied by a mere change in the law.
Nur Azilah Bte Ithnin v Public Prosecutor [2010] SGHC 210
Rehabilitation remains the dominant sentencing consideration for young offenders, even in cases involving unlicensed moneylending harassment, unless the offence is so heinous that deterrence must supersede it.
Luyono Lam v Public Prosecutor [2010] SGHC 158
A custodial sentence is not ordinarily called for under s 48C of the Act where the movement of cash is predicated on a legitimate business and the offender is not involved in money laundering or terrorist activities.
Balbir Singh s/o Amar Singh v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2010] SGHC 123
Assaults on public transport workers warrant deterrent sentences due to their vulnerability and the importance of their service to the public.
Teo Sew Eng v Public Prosecutor [2009] SGHC 88
A custodial sentence for aiding and abetting mischief by fire was reduced on appeal, taking into account the family context and the fact that principal offenders received probation.
CHANDER KUMAR A/L JAYAGARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
An application for leave to review a criminal decision must satisfy the stringent requirements of s 394J of the Criminal Procedure Code, including the requirement that the material relied upon is new and compelling.
Public Prosecutor v Lim Teck Choon [2009] SGHC 3
Offering a bribe to a police officer without solicitation warrants a custodial sentence, and departure from this benchmark is only justified in exceptional circumstances.
Public Prosecutor v ACI [2009] SGHC 246
The court held that in sentencing for an offence under s 308 of the Penal Code, the court must consider all relevant factors, including the accused's mental state, and that the increase in the maximum sentence by Parliament does not automatically mandate higher sentences for offe
Public Prosecutor v Md Mosharaf and Others [2009] SGHC 163
The court held that in sentencing for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s 304(b) of the Penal Code, the court must assess each case on its own merits, considering factors such as the degree of force used, the vulnerability of the victim, and the motive for the offen
Public Prosecutor v Zurina bte Khairuddin [2009] SGHC 11
A sentence of imprisonment imposed on a person already undergoing reformative training must run immediately and in concurrence with the reformative training sentence, as mandated by Schedule D of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Wang Chin Sing v Public Prosecutor [2008] SGHC 215
The role of a middleman in illegal organ trafficking is a significant factor in sentencing, and general deterrence is the primary consideration for such offences.
Wong Hoi Len v Public Prosecutor [2008] SGHC 146
Intoxication is an aggravating factor in sentencing for violent crimes, especially when the victim is a public transport worker.
Cai Mei Ying v Public Prosecutor [2019] SGHC 24
The court affirmed that a custodial sentence is appropriate for causing grievous hurt by negligent cycling in a prohibited area, particularly where the harm is significant.