LIM CHOON BENG v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 18 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGCA 18 Court of Appeal 5 June 2023 CA/CM 18/2023 18 min read

9 cases cited

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

we therefore dismiss the appeal.

Source: [2023] SGCA 18, Court of Appeal, decided 5 June 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	5 June 2023
Judge	Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim	Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Ashley Poh, Selene Yap

Source: [2023] SGCA 18, Court of Appeal, decided 5 June 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Statutory offences — Sexual offences Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal Review — Permission for review

Practice Areas

Criminal Law Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Tay Yong Kwang Delivered

Counsel (3)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Ashley Poh Counsel Respondent Selene Yap Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Lim Choon Beng Applicant

Case Significance

Lim Choon Beng v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 18 is a judgment of Tay Yong Kwang JCA in the Court of Appeal, delivered on 5 June 2023 in Criminal Motion No 18 of 2023. It was an application under s 394H(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 for permission to make an application to review an earlier Court of Appeal decision, brought by the applicant, aged 37 and acting in person while serving his imprisonment sentence. In 2016 he had pleaded guilty to four charges involving sexual offences, with four further charges taken into consideration, and Foo Chee Hock JC imposed a global sentence of 16 years, ten months and two weeks' imprisonment and 22 strokes of the cane; contending a gross miscarriage of justice, the applicant sought a reduction of almost two years to a 15-year global sentence.

[2023] SGCA 18 explained

LIM CHOON BENG v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGCA 18) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 5 June 2023. It is categorised under Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing. 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 18 about?

LIM CHOON BENG v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGCA 18) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Statutory offences — Sexual offences” and “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal Review — Permission for review”, 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 18 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

Lim Choon Beng, who had pleaded guilty to four sexual offence charges and received a global sentence of 16 years, ten months and two weeks' imprisonment and 22 strokes of the cane, applied for permission to make a review application seeking a reduction of his sentence. He argued that a later Court of Appeal decision in Chang Kar Meng constituted a change in the law. The court found that decision had no impact on his sentencing and that none of the statutory requirements for review was satisfied, and dismissed the application summarily.

What was Lim Choon Beng v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 18 about?

It was an application before Tay Yong Kwang JCA, decided on 5 June 2023, under s 394H(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code for permission to review an earlier Court of Appeal decision, brought by a 37-year-old applicant acting in person.

What sentence was the applicant challenging in [2023] SGCA 18?

In 2016 the applicant pleaded guilty to four sexual offence charges, with four taken into consideration, and Foo Chee Hock JC imposed a global sentence of 16 years, ten months and two weeks' imprisonment and 22 strokes; he sought a reduction to 15 years.