Judicial decision-making should proceed according to abstract rules that define categories of similar cases. Rules provide a reasonable assurance that different judges will decide similar cases in a similar way. The notion that equitable remedies are at the discretion of the court, albeit a "weak" discretion, does not provide the same degree of assurance. An insistence upon rules need not be inconsistent with a separation of remedy questions from liability questions. A category of cases that attracts equitable intervention on a particular ground may embrace a number of discrete (but imperfectly defined) remedy categories, which correspond to different remedial requirements. What is often identified as discretion should be understood as an interpretative exercise whereby the boundaries between those categories (and, hence, the rules governing selection of remedy) are given a more precise definition.

By criminalizing certain forms of private consensual sexual conduct, sections 377 and 377A of the Penal Code disregard the individual's sexual autonomy. They impose a particular set of sexual "morals" on a sexually pluralistic Singapore society. I argue in this article that sections 377 and 377A should be abolished and replaced by laws that do not criminalize such private and consensual conduct.

The introduction of the limited liability partnership (LLP) into UK law has taken place against the backdrop of two fundamental law reform projects-one on company law which is currently being considered by the Government and one on partnerships and limited partnerships which is being conducted by the Law Commissions of England and Wales and Scotland-but oddly without reference to or by either. This article considers the unusual gestation process and resulting legal regulation and structure of the LLP against this background of law reform. It also considers whether the LLP will be used and/or is useable-in particular as a vehicle for obtaining immunity for members of the professions from direct or vicarious liability for negligent misstatements; whether the internal structure will be suitable for small businesses; and whether an appropriate creditor/member balance has been achieved. The article then considers some aspects of partnership law reform generally, welcoming the proposals for legal personality, continuity of association and simplification of the definition of a partnership. It suggests revisions to the proposals on contemplated partnerships, the effects of a repudiatory breach on a partnership agreement and the interaction of potentially conflicting fiduciary duties if legal personality is introduced. Finally it suggests a new approach to the law on the liability of innocent partners for the accessory liability of one partner incurred in connection with the firm's activities.

The dichotomy of idealism versus pragmatism pervades the contrast between the Japanese and English approaches to conflict of laws but its manifestation is at its starkest in the treatment of foreign law. When choice-of-law rules indicate the application of a foreign law, its treatment gives rise to various issues. While the Japanese approach is geared to the equal treatment of the domestic and foreign laws, the English approach is very much informed by the need to promote speedy and efficient proceedings. Both idealism and pragmatism are positive attributes and the best balance should be sought between the two for each issue involved.

Judicial and legal institutions in Asia, in general and Singapore, in particular, have come under criticism on the ground that they are not independent from the government of the day. This article explores the problems involved in assessing the value of such a critique: the open-endedness of the idea of independence itself (which in real life is a matter of degree), empirical difficulties in demonstrating that these institutions have indeed succumbed to improper government pressure, and the need to distinguish between institutional independence (as determined by constitutional agreements) and actual independence (as demonstrated by the decisions made in particular cases).