Stare Decisis in Singapore and Malaysia: A sad tale of the use and abuse of statutes
Singapore Law Review, Vol: 4, Issue: 155, Page: 155-164
1983
- 632Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage632
- Downloads620
- Abstract Views12
Article Description
A study of the cases and literature with regard to stare decisis in Singapore and Malaysia will reveal at least one salient characteristic - the propensity, primarily of the Courts, to misread statutes and twist them (whether inadvertently or otherwise) in order to justify a particular conclusion. Ironically enough, at the end of the day, similar (though not identical) conclusions could have been reached without the need to resort to any particular statutory provision. In this short article, I shall not endeavour to retrace ground already well covered by others, but will set out, in rather summary form, further reflections on the use (or abuse, rather) of statutory provisions in the context of our doctrine of precedent.
Bibliographic Details
National University of Singapore Faculty of Law
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know