Statute Details
- Title: Fees (Testing of Private Security Dog Handlers) Order 2018
- Act Code: FeA1920-S574-2018
- Legislative Type: Subsidiary legislation (Order)
- Authorising Act: Fees Act (Cap. 106)
- Enacting Formula (Power Source): Made under section 2 of the Fees Act
- Commencement: Not stated in the extract (Order made on 5 September 2018; published as SL 574/2018)
- Key Provisions:
- Section 1 (Citation): Provides the short title
- Section 2 (Fees): Makes fees in the Schedule payable to the Commissioner of Police
- Section 3 (Revocation): Revokes the earlier Fees (Testing of Security Guard Dog Handlers) Order (O 32)
- Schedule: Fees for testing of private security dog handlers by the Police K-9 unit
- Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026 (per provided extract)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Fees (Testing of Private Security Dog Handlers) Order 2018 is a Singapore subsidiary legislation that sets out the fees payable to the Commissioner of Police for the testing of private security dog handlers by the Police K-9 unit. In practical terms, it answers a straightforward administrative question: how much must a private security dog handler pay when they undergo police testing?
The Order operates within the broader framework of the Fees Act (Cap. 106). Under that Act, the Minister for Finance may prescribe fees for specified services or matters. This Order is one such fee-setting instrument, focusing specifically on the police testing process for private security dog handlers.
Although the extract provided does not reproduce the full Schedule table, the structure is clear: the Schedule lists matters (in the first column) and the corresponding fees (in the second column). Section 2 then makes those Schedule fees payable to the Commissioner of Police.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) is a standard provision. It confirms the short title of the instrument: “Fees (Testing of Private Security Dog Handlers) Order 2018”. While not substantive, citation provisions matter for legal referencing, compliance documentation, and ensuring that the correct instrument is applied in administrative or contractual contexts.
Section 2 (Fees) is the core operative clause. It provides that the fees specified in the second column of the Schedule are payable to the Commissioner of Police in respect of the matters specified opposite in the first column. This drafting technique is common in fee Orders: it ties the legal obligation to pay directly to the Schedule, rather than attempting to describe each fee within the body of the Order.
For practitioners, the practical implication is that the Schedule is not optional. Any advice on cost, budgeting, or compliance should be anchored to the Schedule’s fee amounts and the specific “matters” to which they correspond. If a client is seeking police K-9 testing, the relevant fee is determined by matching the client’s situation to the Schedule entry.
Section 3 (Revocation) revokes the earlier “Fees (Testing of Security Guard Dog Handlers) Order (O 32)”. This indicates a policy or administrative update: the earlier instrument is replaced by a new fee regime tailored to private security dog handlers and administered by the Police K-9 unit. Revocation is legally significant because it prevents confusion about which fee schedule applies and ensures that the current Order governs the relevant testing fees.
From a legal risk perspective, revocation also affects time-based disputes. If a fee was charged before the new Order took effect, the applicable legal basis may differ. Conversely, for testing conducted after the effective date, the revocation suggests that reliance on the old Order would be incorrect.
The Schedule (Fees for testing by Police K-9 unit) is the substantive content where the amounts are set. The extract confirms the Schedule’s theme: “Fees for testing of private security dog handlers by police K-9 unit”. The Schedule’s two-column design typically means that each testing-related “matter” (for example, an initial test, a retest, or another category of assessment) has a corresponding fee.
Even though the fee amounts are not reproduced in the extract you provided, the legal method remains the same: the Schedule defines the fee liability. Practitioners should therefore treat the Schedule as the authoritative source for (i) the fee quantum and (ii) the scope of what triggers payment.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is structured in a concise, standard format for fee instruments:
(1) Enacting Formula and Citation: The Minister for Finance makes the Order under the Fees Act. Section 1 provides the short title.
(2) Operative Provision on Payment (Section 2): Section 2 establishes the legal obligation to pay the Schedule fees to the Commissioner of Police for the specified matters.
(3) Revocation (Section 3): Section 3 removes the earlier fee Order, ensuring that the current fee schedule applies going forward.
(4) Schedule: The Schedule contains the fee table. It is the key document for determining the amount payable and the relevant testing category.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to private security dog handlers who are subject to testing by the Police K-9 unit. In other words, it governs the fee liability arising from police testing of handlers in the private security context.
While the extract does not specify the detailed eligibility criteria for who must undergo testing, the fee obligation is clearly linked to the testing process. Therefore, in advising clients—such as private security companies, dog handler applicants, or compliance officers—the key question is whether the client’s dog handler is being tested by the Police K-9 unit for a “matter” listed in the Schedule. If so, the fee specified for that matter is payable to the Commissioner of Police.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is short, it is important because it directly affects cost and administrative compliance for a regulated activity involving police K-9 testing. For private security operators, the fee is a tangible operational expense and may also affect timelines and budgeting for licensing or deployment-related processes (depending on how testing is integrated into the broader regulatory framework).
From an enforcement and legal certainty standpoint, the Order provides a clear statutory basis for charging fees. Section 2’s mechanism—linking payment to the Schedule—reduces ambiguity and supports consistent administration by the Commissioner of Police. This is particularly relevant where clients might otherwise dispute whether a fee is payable, whether the correct fee category was applied, or whether the correct instrument governs the charge.
Finally, the revocation in Section 3 matters for dispute resolution and historical compliance. If a client is reviewing past charges or challenging an invoice, counsel should consider whether the testing occurred under the old regime (revoked by this Order) or under the current 2018 Order. Correct identification of the applicable legal instrument can be decisive in fee disputes, refunds, or administrative appeals.
Related Legislation
- Fees Act (Cap. 106) — the authorising Act under which the Minister for Finance may prescribe fees
- Fees (Testing of Security Guard Dog Handlers) Order (O 32) — revoked by Section 3 of this Order
- Legislation timeline / amendments records — relevant for confirming the correct version as at a particular date (noted in the provided extract)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Fees (Testing of Private Security Dog Handlers) Order 2018 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.