An innovative invocation of substantive legitimate expectations in Singapore
The Singapore Court of Appeal, the final appellate court in Singapore, has in Tan Seng Kee v Attorney-General [2022] SGCA 16 (“Tan Seng Kee”) recently revisited the vexed question of the constitutionality of section 377A in Singapore’s Penal Code—a provision which criminalises homosexual acts betwee...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4059 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | The Singapore Court of Appeal, the final appellate court in Singapore, has in Tan Seng Kee v Attorney-General [2022] SGCA 16 (“Tan Seng Kee”) recently revisited the vexed question of the constitutionality of section 377A in Singapore’s Penal Code—a provision which criminalises homosexual acts between men whether such acts are committed in public or private. In addition to Tan Seng Kee’s obvious socio-political significance, a point that will be of interest to the readers of this blog is that the crux of the decision rested on a novel invocation of the common law doctrine of substantive legitimate expectations. Indeed, Tan Seng Kee marked the debut of the substantive legitimate expectations doctrine in the Singapore Court of Appeal, albeit with a carefully-circumscribed scope of application. This post will briefly describe the decision in Tan Seng Kee and will critically evaluate the Court of Appeal’s application of the substantive legitimate expectations doctrine. |
|---|