Leading Constitutional Law Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore

The court dismissed OAC 1 summarily under s 60G(8) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 without setting it down for hearing, and refused the stay of execution.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, finding no basis to stay the execution pending the Law Society complaint and treating the second ground as moot.

A single Judge of the Court of Appeal waived the procedural irregularities in the papers given the time available, and dismissed the application summarily without an oral hearing under s 60G(8) of…

The court dismissed the application summarily without an oral hearing, under s 60G(8) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 or alternatively s 394H(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010,…

The court dismissed the application summarily, without an oral hearing, under s 60G(8) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969.

Hoo Sheau Peng J dismissed the application.

Hoo Sheau Peng J granted the Attorney-General's application and struck out OA 972 in its entirety under O 9 r 16(1)(a) of the Rules of Court 2021, holding that the applicants lacked standing and…

A single Judge of the Court of Appeal waived the procedural irregularities in the papers given the time available, and dismissed the application summarily without an oral hearing under s 60G(8) of…

The court dismissed the application summarily without an oral hearing, under s 60G(8) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 or alternatively s 394H(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010,…

The court dismissed the application summarily, without an oral hearing, under s 60G(8) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the basis that the appellants did not have standing to bring the application, and awarded the respondent costs of the appeal fixed at $25,000 (all-in).

The Court of Appeal dismissed SUM 16 in its entirety, declining to reinstate the appeal because the constitutional challenge had no merit.

Hoo Sheau Peng J granted the Attorney-General's application and struck out OA 972 in its entirety under O 9 r 16(1)(a) of the Rules of Court 2021, holding that the applicants lacked standing and…

The High Court refused the adjournment and allowed the Attorney-General's striking-out application, striking out OA 306 in its entirety, including the damages claim, as disclosing no reasonable cause…

Hoo Sheau Peng J allowed the Attorney-General's application and struck out OA987 under O 9 r 16(1)(a) of the Rules of Court 2021, holding that the applicants had no standing and that the claim had no…

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing that the appellants lacked standing so their application disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on 18 January 2024 and later gave its grounds.

The High Court dismissed the application for permission to commence judicial review and the related prayer for a declaration, and awarded the Attorney-General costs of $5,500 all-in.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the basis that the appellants did not have standing to bring the application, and awarded the respondent costs of the appeal fixed at $25,000 (all-in).

The Court of Appeal dismissed SUM 16 in its entirety, declining to reinstate the appeal because the constitutional challenge had no merit.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on 18 January 2024 and later gave its grounds.

The High Court dismissed the application for permission to commence judicial review and the related prayer for a declaration, and awarded the Attorney-General costs of $5,500 all-in.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the basis that the appellants did not have standing to bring the application, and awarded the respondent costs of the appeal fixed at $25,000 (all-in).

The High Court dismissed OA 961 in full, refusing permission to commence judicial review and dismissing the application for an order for review of detention.

Hoo Sheau Peng J dismissed the application.

The High Court dismissed all six applications and said it would hear the parties on costs, including the costs ordered against the applicant at the registrar's case conference on 2 October 2025.

The High Court dismissed all six applications and said it would hear the parties on costs, including the costs ordered against the applicant at the registrar's case conference on 2 October 2025.

The High Court dismissed the appeal.

The High Court dismissed the appeal.

The Court of Appeal dismissed SUM 16 in its entirety, declining to reinstate the appeal because the constitutional challenge had no merit.

The Court of Appeal dismissed SUM 16 in its entirety, declining to reinstate the appeal because the constitutional challenge had no merit.

The High Court refused the adjournment and allowed the Attorney-General's striking-out application, striking out OA 306 in its entirety, including the damages claim, as disclosing no reasonable cause…

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, holding that none of the five questions was a question of law of public interest.

The court did not hear the appeal on its merits and the judge recused himself, but not on the ground of apparent bias.

Aedit Abdullah J dismissed both appeals against conviction on all charges and Mr De Costa's appeal against sentence on the Computer Misuse Act charge.