Statute Details
- Title: Fees (Attendance in Court) Order
- Act Code: FeA1920-OR48
- Type: Subsidiary legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Fees Act (Chapter 106, Section 2)
- Commencement: 1 April 1995
- Current status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026 (per provided extract)
- Key provisions (from extract): Section 1 (Citation); Section 2 (Payment of fees to Ministries and Departments)
- Instrument citation (as shown): G.N. No. S 149/1995
- Revised edition: 1996 RevEd (15 May 1996)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Fees (Attendance in Court) Order is a Singapore subsidiary legal instrument made under the Fees Act. In practical terms, it sets out the framework for paying prescribed fees for court attendance by specified officers. The Order is designed to ensure that when certain categories of officers attend court—whether for hearings, proceedings, or other court-related appearances—appropriate fees are payable according to a schedule.
Although the extract provided shows only the citation and the operative payment rule, the structure of the Order indicates that it works together with a Schedule listing the relevant officers (first column) and the corresponding fees (second column). The key legal effect is that the fees are not paid to individuals directly by the court; instead, they are paid to the relevant government Ministries and Departments, with an important exception for the Singapore Armed Forces.
For practitioners, this Order is relevant where court attendance triggers a fee entitlement or where government agencies administer or account for such fees. It is also relevant for understanding how the Fees Act empowers the Government to prescribe fee regimes through Orders, rather than through primary legislation alone.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) provides the short title of the instrument: the Fees (Attendance in Court) Order. While this appears procedural, citation provisions are important for legal certainty and for referencing the instrument in submissions, internal government circulars, and administrative processes.
Section 2 (Fees payable to Ministries and Departments) is the core operative provision in the extract. It states that “the fees set out in the second column of the Schedule shall be paid to all Ministries and Departments of the Government (except the Singapore Armed Forces) in respect of each half-day’s attendance in court or part thereof by the officers set out in the first column thereof.” This provision contains several practical legal elements:
(1) Fees are prescribed by reference to the Schedule. Section 2 does not itself list the amounts. Instead, it incorporates the Schedule by reference. This means that the legal obligation to pay (and the amount payable) depends on the officer category and the fee amount specified in the Schedule.
(2) Payment is made to Ministries and Departments (not to the court or directly to the officer). The wording “shall be paid to all Ministries and Departments of the Government” indicates that the administrative recipient is the government department employing or responsible for the relevant officer category. In practice, this affects accounting, budgeting, and internal claims processes.
(3) There is an express exception for the Singapore Armed Forces. The Order applies to “all Ministries and Departments of the Government (except the Singapore Armed Forces).” This carve-out is legally significant: even if an officer falls within a category that might otherwise be considered, the Order’s payment mechanism does not extend to the Singapore Armed Forces. Practitioners should therefore be cautious when advising on fee administration involving uniformed defence personnel.
(4) The unit of payment is “each half-day’s attendance in court or part thereof.” This is a common fee-quantification mechanism in government fee instruments. It means that attendance is measured in half-day increments, and importantly, the phrase “or part thereof” suggests that even if attendance is less than a full half-day, the fee is still payable for that half-day unit. For example, if an officer attends for a short morning session that constitutes “part” of a half-day, the fee regime may still treat it as a chargeable half-day. This can be crucial in disputes about whether partial attendance should be billed.
(5) The officers covered are those “set out in the first column” of the Schedule. The Order’s scope is therefore not based on the nature of the case or the court, but on the identity/category of the officer. Without the Schedule text, the precise list of officer categories cannot be confirmed from the extract. However, the legal method is clear: identify the officer category in the Schedule’s first column; then apply the corresponding fee amount in the second column.
Because Section 2 is drafted as a mandatory “shall be paid” provision, it creates a clear administrative entitlement/obligation once the conditions are met: (i) the officer is within the Schedule, (ii) there is court attendance, and (iii) the attendance is measured in half-day units (or part thereof). This mandatory language reduces discretion and supports predictable fee administration.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Order is structured in a straightforward manner typical of fee Orders: it begins with a citation provision, followed by an operative payment rule, and then a Schedule that contains the detailed fee table.
From the extract, the structure includes:
- Section 1: Citation (short title).
- Section 2: The operative rule on payment of fees to Ministries and Departments, referencing the Schedule and defining the half-day attendance basis.
- The Schedule: A table with at least two columns: (a) the officers covered (first column) and (b) the fees payable (second column). The Schedule is essential because it supplies the actual fee amounts and the relevant officer categories.
Notably, the extract does not show additional sections or complex procedural provisions. That suggests the Order’s function is primarily to prescribe the fee regime, leaving administrative implementation to the relevant Ministries and Departments.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to Ministries and Departments of the Government (collectively, the administrative recipients of the fees), with an explicit exception for the Singapore Armed Forces. It also applies to officers who are listed in the Schedule’s first column. The fee is payable “in respect of each half-day’s attendance in court or part thereof” by those officers.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the practical question is usually not “who is the litigant?” but rather “which officer category is attending court, and which government department is responsible for that officer’s administration?” The Order’s applicability turns on the officer category and the attendance measurement, rather than on the subject matter of the case.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the extract is brief, the Order is important because it operationalises the Fees Act by setting a specific fee mechanism for court attendance. Fee instruments like this can affect how government agencies budget for litigation-related activities and how they process internal claims or reimbursements connected to court appearances.
For lawyers advising government bodies, or for counsel involved in administrative or inter-departmental matters, the Order provides a legal basis for the payment of court attendance fees. The mandatory “shall be paid” language supports the view that once the conditions are met, the fee regime is not discretionary. This can matter in situations where there is disagreement about whether a particular attendance qualifies as chargeable, particularly given the “half-day’s attendance or part thereof” wording.
In addition, the explicit exclusion of the Singapore Armed Forces is a key compliance point. If a matter involves defence personnel, practitioners should not assume that the same fee regime applies. Instead, they should check whether other instruments govern fees for those personnel or whether a different administrative framework applies.
Finally, because the Order incorporates the Schedule, practitioners should treat the Schedule as the authoritative source for both the officer categories and the fee amounts. Any legal analysis or advice about entitlement or payable amounts must be anchored to the Schedule’s table, not merely to the general rule in Section 2.
Related Legislation
- Fees Act (Chapter 106), in particular Section 2 (authorising the making of Orders prescribing fees)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Fees (Attendance in Court) Order for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.