Reform of the law of secured transactions has been discussed in the United Kingdom ("UK") for more than forty years, starting with the Crowther Committee, Report of the Committee on Consumer Credit (1971), followed by the Cork Committee, Report of the Review Committee on Insolvency Law and Practice (1982), the Report by theWorking Party on Security over Moveable Property (1986) chaired by Professor John Halliday, A L Diamond, A Review of Security Interests in Property (1989), the Company Law Review Steering Group, Modern Company Law: For a Competitive Economy: Final Report (2001) and the Law Commission, Company Security Interests: A Consultative Report (2004) and Company Security Interests: Final Report (2005). Recommendations for reform made through the years have remained largely un-enacted, apart from limited changes made to the system of registration of company charges in 2013. The members of the Secured Transactions Law Reform Project ("STR") founded by Professor Sir Roy Goode and currently directed by Professor Louise Gullifer, are of the view that there are serious shortcomings in the law of England and Wales as it relates to security over personal property, even after the 2013 reforms. Secured Transactions Law Reform: Principles, Policies and Practice grew out of a conference organised by the STR to learn from the experience of other jurisdictions so as to inform the reform process in England and Wales. The volume has 24 chapters, comprising conference papers supplemented by post-conference material.

Shortly after the government announced its intention to develop a comprehensive underground masterplan, the Singapore Parliament made amendments to the law in the area of the surface landowner's claim to the subsoil underground. This paper outlines and evaluates the changes made and posits that they represent a significant departure from the pre-existing law, particularly in the establishment of a clear cut-off point beneath which the surface landowner may make no ownership claim, and in the creation of a statutory easement in favour of the surface plot over all other land capable of providing subjacent support. These provisions are likely to gain importance as underground development and land use intensifies. However, this paper concludes that the changes bring with them some discomfort as to the content of the rights of real property in Singapore, even as they seek to provide clarity in an area of law where previously a dearth of authority existed, given that critical structural and interpretive gaps in the law remain. There is still some way to go before it can truly be said that a workable legal framework for underground land use has been created.

Shadow banking is a phenomenon of global concern because it entails risks for financial stability that need to be adequately addressed by regulation. Easier said than done, one could object, because it is a tricky task for regulators to respond appropriately. Singapore, one of the largest financial centres in Asia and the world, is a hub for financial intermediaries that are considered shadow banks. Data transmitted by Singapore to the Financial Stability Board provides the basis for this analysis of the relevance of shadow banks and risk-containing regulation applicable to them—the first of its kind for Singapore. In line with global efforts to curb risks for financial stability while avoiding excessive limitations on useful financial services, the article points out areas in which particular vigilance is indicated and suggests changes to existing regulation.

The rules on standing in Singapore have traditionally restricted the commencement of judicial review proceedings by anyone other than applicants directly and individually affected by either a legislative provision or executive action: there has been little scope for what is known as 'public interest litigation' (in all its various forms). This had been the landscape of public law adjudication in Singapore until recently. However, in the past five years, the courts have had to consider challenges by applicants in the absence of such a direct interest. Thus far, the discussion on these cases has focused on broader issues of constitutional interpretation and what the cases indicate about constitutionalism in Singapore. There has been little discussion on issues of standing and what this implies about the role of public law adjudication in Singapore. This article will show how, while explicitly rejecting the possibility of public interest litigation, the courts have provided some scope for developing a more circumscribed form of 'representative' standing in serious cases of illegality or unconstitutionality with built-in control features to prevent actions by 'busybodies' and ensure that the court does not become involved in free-standing political debate. It will propose how these developments may evolve over time, particularly, in a way that maintains the controls the courts have introduced thus far.

An important trend in the world of computing is the rise of cloud technology, whereby on-demand and self-service computing resources are delivered through the internet. The 'cloud' is a disruptive technology that challenges some of the entrenched business models of the IT industry, offering important benefits such as greater flexibility, scalability and utility-based pricing. This paper explores the use of cloud technology by financial institutions and the factors that impact further adoption of cloud technology in the financial sector. Furthermore, this paper investigates how the financial regulator in Singapore, one of the most important financial jurisdictions, is tackling the risks that outsourcing to the 'cloud' involves. It is argued that a number of novel features can be found in the regulator's approach, including a balanced use of principles and rules, a diverse and multi-layered structure of compliance strategies, and engaging cloud service contracts as a means to maintaining regulatory oversight.

This article discusses the application of the concept of issue estoppel to consent judgments. Four High Court decisions have reached conflicting conclusions on this topic and created considerable conceptual difficulties. The article discusses the underlying reasons for the differences in these decisions, focusing on the dissonance brought about by the conventional policies underlying issue estoppel and the differing policy concerns applying to consent judgments. The article recommends that the courts take into account the unique nature of consent judgments, and use a modified test of issue estoppel for consent judgments. It also suggests that the extended doctrine of res judicata is much more appropriate for consent orders.

Competition law principles in Singapore provide that a company may be liable for the conduct of another company if they belong to a single economic entity, even though they each have a separate legal personality. The CCS has used this doctrine to hold parent companies liable for the actions of their subsidiaries, and vice versa. This article discusses this process of attribution, and proposes several clarifications that may be helpful to strengthen the doctrine.

This article seeks to argue for the inclusion of constructive trusts as a statutory exception to indefeasibility in the LTA given the persistent uncertainty surrounding this issue. Among others, it is argued that constructive trusts are already recognised in the LTA, albeit indirectly. In addition, the Court of Appeal in Bebe may not be right in its consideration of section 47(3) of the LTA and the earlier Court of Appeal decision in Betsy Lim which applied the constructive trust. In any event, recognising constructive trusts as a statutory exception does not go against the policy objectives of the Singapore Torrens system as embodied in the LTA.

Singapore competition law prohibits agreements that have as their object the restriction of competition. Recent developments, both in Singapore and abroad, have had a significant impact on this aspect of competition law. This article discusses the law on object restrictions in Singapore in light of these recent developments, and offers three recommendations on the same.

Criminal Law in Myanmar deserves a far wider audience than its title suggests. The authors propose an ambitious reform of the Penal Code (The Myanmar Code,Volume VIII, Part IX) [Myanmar Penal Code], which is a copy with minor variations of the Penal Code 1860 (Act No 45 of 1860, India) [Indian Penal Code]. Myanmar, Burma as it was then, inherited the Indian Penal Code in 1886 together with the Code of Penal Procedure 1861 (Act No 24 of 1861, India) and the Evidence Act 1872 (Act No 1 of 1872, India). The Indian Penal Code was based on Thomas Macaulay's draft Penal Code of 1837 which, after long delay and revision by the Indian Law Commission, became law in India in 1860. The Indian Penal Code has been retained, its fundamental structure unchanged, in post-colonial Asian nations. The authors' proposals for reform are offered accordingly as a model for renovation of the Penal Codes of India, Malaysia and Singapore as well as Myanmar.