Singapore Court Visit and Case Analysis

This assignment delves into the student's experience visiting a Singapore court, analyzing two contrasting cases: 'Creative Technology Ltd and Another v Huawei International Pte Ltd' (civil) and 'Public Prosecutor v Chan Lie Sian' (criminal). The analysis highlights the differences in procedures, legal frameworks, and outcomes between civil and criminal proceedings. It emphasizes the practical application of legal concepts learned in textbooks and classrooms, providing insights into the Singapore judicial system's functioning.

Running head: BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Business Law Assignment
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
The court visit would enable the student to understand the jurisdictions of the different courts
and the matters dealt by each court. The difference between the civil and the criminal
proceedings are as follows:
 The first case is a civil suit and the second case citation is a criminal case;
 The proceedings of the civil suit had been conducted before the District Judge and the
legal proceedings for the second case had been held before the Magistrate Court;
 The civil suit was dealt under the Contract Act whereas the second case was dealt under
the Code of Criminal Procedure;
 The penalties levied upon the wrongdoer and the accused person differs in each of legal
proceedings;
On the other hand, the similarity between both the civil and criminal proceedings in
Singapore is as follows:
 . The trial proceedings in both the cases were heard before the High Court of Singapore;
 In both the legal proceedings, the accused and the wrongdoer were imposed penalties;
 The High Court attends both civil and criminal matters as well as the decisions of the
Magistrate’s courts and District courts.
 The High Court exercises its supervisory jurisdiction over all the subordinates’ courts
with respect to civil or criminal matters. The difference between the criminal and the civil
proceedings can be demonstrated by the following two cases

2BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Date and Time: 26 August 2017, 11:30 am
Name of the Proceeding: Creative Technology Ltd and Another v Huawei International Pte
Ltd[2017] SGHC 201
Name of the Court: High Court, Singapore
Name of the Judge: Chang Seng Onn
Nature of Dispute: anticipatory breach of contract, misrepresentation of facts,
Infringement of implied terms of contract
Name of counsel: The counsels for plaintiff were Yim Wing Kuen Jimmy SC
Soo Ziyang, Huang Junjie and for defendant Andre Francis
Maniam, Yong Shuyi, Alma and Siew Guowei
Name of the proceeding: Creative Technology Ltd and Another v Huawei International Pte
Ltd [2017] SGHC 201
Overview of the case
The issue arising in the present case is related to the breach of contract, misstatement and
misrepresentation of fact. CTL entered into a contract with Huawei International Pte where the
respondent consented to operate WiMAX network on behalf of CTL. The dispute arose in
respect of the annexure 6 of the contract agreement. After perusing the matter, Creative
terminated the contract as there was a breach of contract terms of providing good quality
product.
Court’s decision

3BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
After perusing the arguments and evidences presented by both the parties, court held that
Huawei provided a wrong statement to creative statement. Further, the defendant was held liable
for causing misstatement and was imposed pecuniary penalties on him.
Public Prosecutor v Chan Lie Sian [2017] SGHC 205
Date and Time: 25 August 2017. 11.00 a.m.
Name of the Court: High Court, Singapore
Nature of the proceeding: Public Prosecutor v Chan Lie Sian [2017] SGHC 205
Name of Judge: Hoo Sheau Peng
Nature of Dispute: commission of murder is the issue in this case.
Case Overview:
The defendant was convicted for committing murder under section 300 (a) and Section 302 (1)
of the Criminal Procedure Code. The accused was alleged to have beaten the deceased to death,
as he believed that the deceased had stolen amount of money from the accused.
Court’s decision
Since the accused person failed to take any reasonable steps in his defense, the court held the
accused person guilty of murder under section 300 (a) of Crpc and awarded him with
punishment.

4BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Personal Observation
Therefore, from the court visit and going through such cases the student will understand
the applicability of the legal provisions that they study in books and classroom. Thus, the case
will throw a light on the practical applicability of the legal provisions and the function of the
judicial system in implementing and interpretation of the laws in the country. Thus, I gained the
practical applications of the legal provisions and knowledge regarding the practical functionality
of the courts.

5BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT
Reference:
(2017). Retrieved 24 August 2017, from
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2017/32.html
Cane, P., & Atiyah, P. S. (2013). Atiyah's accidents, compensation and the law. Cambridge
University Press.
Craig, A., Tran, Y., Guest, R., Gopinath, B., Jagnoor, J., Bryant, R. A., ... & Cameron, I. (2016).
Psychological impact of injuries sustained in motor vehicle crashes: systematic review
and meta-analysis. BMJ open, 6(9), e011993.
Douglas, J., Atkins, E., & Clift, H. (2015). Judicial Rulings with Prospective Effect in Australia.
In Comparing the Prospective Effect of Judicial Rulings Across Jurisdictions (pp. 349-
358). Springer International Publishing.
Elbers, N. A., Collie, A., Hogg-Johnson, S., Lippel, K., Lockwood, K., & Cameron, I. D. (2016).
Differences in perceived fairness and health outcomes in two injury compensation
systems: a comparative study. BMC public health, 16(1), 658.
Tokley, A. (2017). Applications for special leave to appeal to the high court. Bulletin (Law
Society of South Australia), 39(6), 20.