JUMAAT BIN MOHAMED SAYED & 3 Ors v ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Steven Chong |
| Charges / claim | Civil Procedure |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Claire Poh, Hay Hung Chun, Theong Li Han |
Source: [2023] SGCA 16, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
Case Significance
Jumaat bin Mohamed Sayed and others v Attorney-General [2023] SGCA 16 is a judgment of Steven Chong JCA in the Court of Appeal, delivered on 25 May 2023 in Civil Appeal No 2 of 2023 (Summons No 8 of 2023). By SUM 8, the four applicants sought the reinstatement of their appeal in CA 2 and an extension of time to file the Appellants' Case, Record of Appeal, Core Bundle and other documents under O 19 r 30(4) of the Rules of Court 2021, tied to the outcome of prospective Foreign Counsel Applications for Mr Edward Fitzgerald KC and Mr Theodoros Kassimatis KC. Notwithstanding that framing, the Admission Applications had not been filed. CA 2 was an appeal against Justice Valerie Thean's dismissal of HC/OA 480/2022, which concerned the Misuse of Drugs Act presumptions.
[2023] SGCA 16 explained
JUMAAT BIN MOHAMED SAYED & 3 Ors v ATTORNEY-GENERAL ([2023] SGCA 16) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 25 May 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2023] SGCA 16 about?
JUMAAT BIN MOHAMED SAYED & 3 Ors v ATTORNEY-GENERAL ([2023] SGCA 16) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure — Extension of time — Filing documents out of time”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 16 consider?
The judgment refers to Act in force at the time of their respective trials and appeals was the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGCA 16 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC(A) 14, [2023] SGCA 13, and [2023] SGCA 9. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
What did Jumaat bin Mohamed Sayed v Attorney-General [2023] SGCA 16 concern?
Steven Chong JCA considered SUM 8, an application by four applicants to reinstate their appeal in CA 2 and extend time to file their appeal documents under the Rules of Court 2021, pending Foreign Counsel Applications that had not yet been filed. Delivered 25 May 2023.
What was the appeal in CA 2 about in Jumaat bin Mohamed Sayed v Attorney-General [2023] SGCA 16?
CA 2 was an appeal against Justice Valerie Thean's dismissal of HC/OA 480/2022, in which the applicants sought permission to argue that presumptions in ss 18(1) and 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act should be read down.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (14)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGCA 16)