Methodology

How we compile what you read on SG Case Law, where the facts come from, and the limits we work within.

Primary sources only

Every factual claim about Singapore law is grounded in primary sources: the court judgments themselves (published on eLitigation) and the legislation on Singapore Statutes Online. Where we describe a legal principle, we link the decided cases and statutory provisions it rests on, so you can read the source yourself. Every explainer ends with the actual cases.

How pages are produced

This site is built with AI assistance, and we would rather say so plainly than imply otherwise. Case summaries, explainers, and entity narratives are drafted by AI systems working from the official judgment text, then run through automated grounding rules: case citations and statute references must resolve against the corpus, quoted dispositions are checked verbatim against the preserved official text, and pages that fail those checks are held back. Structured data (outcomes, sentences, quantum figures, counsel and court records) is extracted from the judgments rather than written freehand, and every page links the primary sources so you can verify it yourself.

Organizational authorship

Our pages are compiled and published under organizational authorship as the SG Case Law editorial team. We do not attribute pages to a named lawyer, and nothing here is written or signed off by an individual Advocate & Solicitor — we would rather be transparent about that than invent a byline. Where a page would require professional judgement we cannot verify from the primary sources, we hold it back (see below).

What we publish — and what we hold back

Each editorial page is classified before it is published:

• Data — verifiable figures and aggregates computed directly from the corpus (for example, what courts have awarded, or which cases are cited most).
• Explainer — plain-English explanations of a doctrine, statute, or procedure, grounded in and linked to decided cases.
• Held back — material that edges toward advising a reader what to do is kept in draft and not published until it can be reviewed by a qualified lawyer. It is not indexed in the meantime.

Grounding standard

A topic earns a page only once it is sufficiently grounded in the corpus — for example, a doctrine needs enough decided cases (or a clearly leading case) behind it. Thinly-supported topics are not published. This keeps our coverage tied to what the courts have actually said, not to what is merely popular to search for.

Corrections & freshness

Law changes — cases are appealed and overruled, and statutes are amended. When that happens we re-review the affected pages and update them, showing an honest “Updated” date rather than a cosmetic refresh. If you spot an error, please tell us.