Statute Details
- Title: Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002
- Act Code: TA1967-S127-2002
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary Legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Trustees Act (Cap. 337)
- Key Enabling Provision: Section 83 of the Trustees Act
- Enacting Formula: Made by the Minister for Law under the powers conferred by section 83
- Citation: “Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002”
- Order Date / Made: 15 March 2002
- SL Number: SL 127/2002
- Commencement: Not specified in the extract (practitioners should confirm in the official gazette/legislation record)
- Current Version Status: Current version as at 27 March 2026 (per the legislation portal)
- Core Substantive Provision: Declaration of a specific unit trust scheme as an “authorised unit trust scheme”
What Is This Legislation About?
The Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002 is a short piece of subsidiary legislation that performs a single, targeted function: it declares a particular collective investment product—the “Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund — April 2005”—to be an “authorised unit trust scheme” for the purposes of the Trustees Act.
In practical terms, the Order is part of Singapore’s regulatory framework for trustees and trust investments. The Trustees Act governs, among other things, what trustees may do and what kinds of investments may be treated as permissible or suitable within the statutory scheme. By designating certain unit trust schemes as “authorised”, the Minister for Law enables trustees to invest in those schemes under the conditions and legal consequences set out in the Trustees Act.
Although the Order itself contains only two operative provisions (citation and the declaration), its legal significance lies in how it plugs into the wider Trustees Act regime. The declaration affects the legal status of the named unit trust scheme, which in turn can influence trustee decision-making, compliance, and the administration of trust assets.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) provides the formal name by which the Order may be cited. This is standard drafting: it ensures that practitioners can reliably reference the instrument in correspondence, filings, and legal submissions.
Section 2 (Authorised unit trust scheme) is the substantive provision. It states that “The Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund — April 2005 is hereby declared as an authorised unit trust scheme for the purposes of the Act.” This is a declaratory act: the Order does not regulate the internal operations of the fund (such as its investment mandate, valuation methodology, or distribution policy). Instead, it confers a legal classification relevant to trustees under the Trustees Act.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the key questions are: (1) what legal consequences flow from a scheme being “authorised” under the Trustees Act; and (2) whether the trustee’s intended use of the scheme falls within those consequences. The Order itself does not elaborate on those consequences. Those details are found in the Trustees Act and any related subsidiary instruments, guidance, or conditions attached to authorisation.
Enabling authority and ministerial discretion. The enacting formula indicates that the Minister for Law acts under section 83 of the Trustees Act. This matters because it signals that the authorisation is an exercise of statutory power, not merely an administrative endorsement. In disputes or compliance reviews, the existence of a valid authorisation order can be critical to establishing that a trustee relied on a legally recognised category of investment.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is extremely concise and is structured as a two-section instrument.
Section 1 is purely procedural (citation). Section 2 is the operative clause that declares the named unit trust scheme to be “authorised” for the purposes of the Trustees Act. There are no schedules, no conditions stated in the extract, and no additional administrative provisions within the Order itself.
Because the instrument is short, the “structure” of the legal effect is best understood as a linkage: the Order supplies the authorisation classification, while the Trustees Act supplies the substantive trustee rules that attach to that classification. Practitioners should therefore read the Order together with the relevant provisions of the Trustees Act (particularly section 83 and the provisions that define or govern trustee investments and permissible trust investments).
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to trustees and trust administrators who are subject to the Trustees Act. Its effect is not directed at retail investors or the fund manager directly; rather, it affects trustees’ ability to treat the specified unit trust scheme as an “authorised unit trust scheme” when making investment decisions for trust property.
In practice, the beneficiaries of the Order’s legal effect are trustees (including professional trustees and potentially other persons acting in a trustee capacity) who need to ensure that their investment choices comply with statutory requirements. The fund itself benefits indirectly because authorisation can make the scheme more accessible as a trustee-eligible investment, but the compliance obligations and legal consequences are primarily borne by trustees under the Trustees Act framework.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Even though the Order is brief, it can be highly consequential in trustee practice. Trustee investment decisions often require careful legal justification, particularly where trustees must demonstrate that investments fall within permitted categories. An “authorised unit trust scheme” designation provides a legally recognised basis for including the scheme within a trustee’s investment portfolio, subject to the Trustees Act’s broader requirements.
From an enforcement and risk-management standpoint, the authorisation order can be central evidence in compliance reviews. If a trustee’s investment is later challenged—whether by beneficiaries, auditors, or regulators—the trustee may need to show that the investment was of a type that the law permits. The existence of a specific authorisation order naming the scheme can support that position.
For practitioners advising trustees, the Order also highlights a practical drafting point: authorisation is scheme-specific. The Order names “Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund — April 2005”. This specificity means that trustees should not assume that related or similarly named funds are automatically covered. Where a trustee is considering a different series, launch date, or variant, counsel should verify whether there is a corresponding authorisation order for that exact scheme.
Related Legislation
- Trustees Act (Chapter 337) — in particular, section 83 (the enabling provision referenced in the enacting formula)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.