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)
- Enacting Authority: Minister for Law
- Enacting Power: Powers under section 83 of the Trustees Act
- Primary Provisions (from extract): Sections 1–2
- Citation Provision: Section 1
- Designation of Scheme: Section 2
- Order Date / Made: 15 March 2002
- Publication Reference: SL 127/2002
- Status: Current version as at 27 March 2026 (per provided extract)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002 is a short but legally significant instrument. In plain terms, it “authorises” a specific unit trust scheme—meaning it formally designates that scheme as an authorised unit trust scheme for the purposes of the Trustees Act.
Unit trusts are collective investment arrangements. The legal framework in Singapore distinguishes between schemes that are authorised under the relevant statutory regime and those that are not. Authorisation is not merely a label; it affects the regulatory status of the scheme and the legal permissions and compliance expectations that follow from the Trustees Act.
This particular Order does not create a new regulatory framework from scratch. Instead, it uses the Minister for Law’s statutory power to declare a named scheme as authorised. The Order therefore operates as a targeted legal “gateway” for one scheme: Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund — April 2005.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation) provides the formal short title of the Order: it may be cited as the Trustees (Authorised Unit Trust Scheme) (No. 6) Order 2002. While this is standard drafting, it matters for legal referencing in filings, compliance documentation, and correspondence with regulators and counterparties.
Section 2 (Authorised unit trust scheme) is the substantive provision. It declares 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. In other words, the scheme’s name and description are the legal identifiers that determine whether the authorisation applies.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the precision of the scheme description is crucial. The Order does not authorise “Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund” in general; it authorises the specific scheme as described—“— April 2005”. This suggests that the authorisation is tied to a particular series, launch period, or version of the fund. Where unit trust schemes are structured in tranches or have distinct offer periods, legal authorisation may be version-specific. Lawyers should therefore treat the scheme naming convention in the Order as a compliance anchor.
Enacting formula and statutory basis (as reflected in the extract) confirm that the Minister for Law acts “in exercise of the powers conferred by section 83 of the Trustees Act.” This is important for statutory interpretation. It indicates that the authorisation is made under a specific enabling provision, and that the Minister’s discretion and the procedural requirements (if any) are governed by section 83. Even though the extract does not reproduce section 83, the practitioner should consult it to understand: (i) what criteria must be met for authorisation; (ii) whether there are conditions; (iii) whether authorisation is time-limited; and (iv) how authorisation interacts with other regulatory approvals.
Making date and signature (“Made this 15th day of March 2002” and the signature of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Law) confirms the formal validity of the instrument. For legal work, the making date can be relevant when determining the timeline of authorisation, especially if there were transitional arrangements or if the scheme’s launch documentation references the authorisation date.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
This Order is extremely concise and is structured around two provisions:
(1) Section 1 sets out the citation (short title).
(2) Section 2 designates the specific unit trust scheme as authorised under the Trustees Act.
There are no parts, schedules, or detailed regulatory requirements in the extract provided. The instrument’s structure reflects its function: it is a declaratory authorisation order rather than a comprehensive regulatory code.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies primarily to the named unit trust scheme—Schroder US$ China Capital Protection Fund — April 2005—and, by extension, to the parties responsible for operating and marketing that scheme in Singapore under the Trustees Act framework.
In practical terms, the authorisation designation is relevant to trustees, fund managers, distributors, and other service providers who must ensure that the scheme they administer or offer is properly authorised. It also becomes relevant to investors and counterparties indirectly, because authorisation status can affect the legal protections, disclosure expectations, and compliance obligations that attach to the scheme under the Trustees Act and related subsidiary instruments.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is brief, it is legally important because authorisation is often a prerequisite for lawful operation within the relevant statutory regime. For practitioners, the key value of this Order is that it provides a formal, legally citable basis for treating the specified scheme as an “authorised unit trust scheme” under the Trustees Act.
In due diligence and compliance work, lawyers frequently need to confirm whether a particular fund is authorised. This Order serves as documentary proof. It can be used to support representations in offering materials, trustee confirmations, regulatory submissions, and contractual clauses that require the scheme to be authorised under the applicable legislation.
Additionally, the scheme-specific nature of the authorisation has practical implications. If a fund undergoes restructuring, changes its offer period, or launches a new series (for example, moving from an “April 2005” version to another version), the authorisation may need to be revisited. The existence of multiple “(No. X)” Orders in the same series (as suggested by the title “(No. 6)”) indicates that authorisations may be granted for different schemes or different versions at different times. Lawyers should therefore verify the exact scheme name and version when advising on regulatory status.
Related Legislation
- Trustees Act (Chapter 337) — in particular, section 83 (the enabling provision referenced in the Order)
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.