Statute Details
- Title: Order under Section 11(3)
- Act Code: RELA1983-S134-2008
- Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Enacting Authority: President of Singapore
- Authorising Act: Revised Edition of the Laws Act (Cap. 275)
- Key Legal Basis: Section 11(3) of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act
- Legislation Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Commencement / Effective Date: 31 March 2008 (for the specified Acts)
- Instrument Number: S 134
- Gazette / Publication Date (as shown in timeline): 20 Mar 2008
- Document Date: 17 March 2008
What Is This Legislation About?
This instrument is a formal “order” made under section 11(3) of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act (Cap. 275). In practical terms, it is not a regulatory measure that creates new rights or obligations for the public. Instead, it addresses a foundational legal question: which version of certain Acts should be treated as the authoritative law in Singapore courts and for all legal purposes.
The Revised Edition of the Laws Act provides a mechanism for the Law Revision Commissioners to publish Acts in a “loose-leaf” format. Loose-leaf editions are typically updated and maintained to reflect the law as at a particular cut-off date. The President’s order under section 11(3) then determines whether those loose-leaf editions become, for specified Acts, the “sole and only proper law” of Singapore—meaning courts and legal practitioners must treat that loose-leaf version as the definitive text.
In this particular Order (S 134/2008), the President specifies that the loose-leaf editions of the Acts set out in the Schedule are to be the sole and only proper law of Singapore in respect of those Acts, with effect from 31 March 2008. The instrument’s legal significance lies in legal certainty: it prevents disputes about whether an earlier printed edition, an updated loose-leaf version, or other compilations represent the authoritative statutory text.
What Are the Key Provisions?
1. The “sole and only proper law” mechanism (core operative effect). The Order’s operative clause provides that the loose-leaf editions of the Acts listed in the Schedule shall be, “with effect from 31st March 2008, the sole and only proper law of Singapore” in respect of those Acts. This language is designed to be comprehensive. It signals that, for the specified Acts, the loose-leaf edition is not merely persuasive or convenient—it is the definitive legal text for all courts and all purposes.
2. Triggered by the Law Revision Commissioners’ publication. The preamble explains the procedural background. Pursuant to section 10 of the Revised Edition of the Laws Act, the Law Revision Commissioners have published in loose-leaf form the Acts set out in the Schedule “as in force on 1st March 2008.” This establishes the cut-off date for the content of the loose-leaf editions. The President’s order then “locks in” that loose-leaf version as the authoritative law from the effective date.
3. President’s discretion exercised through a Gazette order. The Order also reflects the statutory pathway: section 11(3) provides that the Commissioners shall transmit to the President a copy of each loose-leaf edition, and the President may then, by order published in the Gazette, specify that the loose-leaf editions shall be the sole and only proper law. This ensures that the authoritative status is conferred through formal executive action and public notice, rather than by administrative publication alone.
4. Effective date and legal continuity. The Order states an effective date of 31 March 2008. This matters for practitioners because it defines when the authoritative text changes. For matters involving events before and after that date, counsel may need to consider which version of the statutory provisions applied at the relevant time. While the Order makes the loose-leaf edition the sole and only proper law from 31 March 2008, the substantive law governing past events may still depend on the version in force at the time of the events—an issue typically resolved by looking at the relevant amendments and commencement provisions. Nonetheless, the Order is crucial for determining what text is authoritative for interpretation and citation in court from the effective date.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This instrument is structured in a conventional format for Singapore subsidiary legislation orders: it contains an enacting formula, a preamble (“Whereas” clauses), and an operative provision. The operative provision is contained in the main body of the Order, followed by a reference to “THE SCHEDULE.”
The Schedule is central to the instrument’s scope. Although the extract provided does not reproduce the Schedule contents, the Schedule would list the specific Acts whose loose-leaf editions are being designated as the sole and only proper law. In practice, the Schedule is what practitioners must consult to identify which Acts are affected by the Order.
Finally, the instrument includes formal details: the date of signing (17 March 2008), the signatory (the Secretary to the Cabinet, by command), and the instrument number (No. S 134). These elements are important for citation and for confirming the correct version and effective date when conducting legal research.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to courts and all persons dealing with the specified Acts. Its legal effect is directed at the legal system’s treatment of the statutory text: it requires that, in all courts and for all purposes, the loose-leaf editions listed in the Schedule are the sole and only proper law of Singapore in respect of those Acts.
Although the Order does not impose regulatory duties on a particular class of individuals (such as employers, licensees, or regulated entities), it has practical implications for lawyers, litigants, and anyone relying on statutory interpretation. For legal practitioners, the Order affects how legislation should be cited and which version should be treated as authoritative when drafting pleadings, preparing submissions, or advising clients.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
First, it promotes legal certainty and consistency. Statutory interpretation depends heavily on the exact wording of provisions. If multiple versions of an Act circulate—such as earlier printed editions, unofficial compilations, or updated loose-leaf materials—there is a risk of confusion about what text is authoritative. By designating the loose-leaf editions as the sole and only proper law, the Order eliminates ambiguity and reduces the likelihood of disputes about the correct statutory text.
Second, it supports efficient legal research and court administration. Courts and practitioners can rely on a single authoritative source for the specified Acts. This is particularly important in jurisdictions where amendments occur frequently and where legal texts must be updated systematically. The loose-leaf system allows for ongoing updates, and the President’s order ensures that those updates are recognized as the proper law for legal purposes.
Third, it has practical litigation impact. In litigation, counsel must cite the correct statutory provisions. If the authoritative text changes as of 31 March 2008, counsel must ensure that references to the Act reflect the correct version for the relevant period. Even where the substantive legal position may not change, the precise wording can affect interpretation, the availability of defences, the scope of offences, procedural requirements, and the construction of statutory terms.
Finally, the Order illustrates an important feature of Singapore’s legislative framework: the Revised Edition of the Laws Act provides a structured method for maintaining and validating authoritative legislative texts. For practitioners, understanding this framework helps in assessing the reliability of legal sources and in ensuring that citations align with the law’s official status.
Related Legislation
- Revised Edition of the Laws Act (Chapter 275) — in particular sections 10 and 11(3), which govern the publication of loose-leaf editions and the President’s power to designate them as the sole and only proper law.
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Order under Section 11(3) for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.