This article focuses on the lack of symbiosis between provisions within the Criminal Procedure Code and between that statute and the Evidence Act concerning the admissibility at trial of statements of witnesses to the police. The subject is of immense importance because the determination of guilt and innocence can often turn on the admissibility of a witness's previous statement. The article will examine the difficulties which arise from the legislation and consider the appropriateness of reform.

This article follows-up from past articles on the enforceability of mediation clauses. It comments on two cases; one English and the other Australian, and explores their different approaches to the enforceability of dispute resolution clauses. The author goes on to suggest some requirements for enforceability that the Singapore courts may chose to adopt.

This article examines the common law defence of illegality in contract, restitution and trust law. It operates as a bar to claims brought in relation to transactions which contravene the law or are deemed contrary to public policy. The defence frequently produces unjust results, and this has led the courts to intervene to assist claimants. Such assistance takes a number of forms, varying from a generous interpretation of illegality to the development of specific exceptions. However, in consequence, this area of law is characterised by a complex matrix of judicial interpretation and discretion with a number of ill-defined exceptions, which lead to transactional uncertainty. Litigants find it difficult to ascertain, without judicial intervention, whether they may bring an action in contract, restitution or trust law. Whilst the legislators and reformers have maintained the need for an illegality defence, this article examines recent recommendations for reform and questions whether the developing doctrine of restitution (or unjust enrichment) in English law is capable of providing an adequate basis of change. In particular, this article examines the concept of a "structured discretion" forwarded recently by the English Law Commission, and considers whether such a proposal can succeed in providing the reform this area of law badly needs.

In 1998, a court of three judges in Law Society of Singapore v Edmund Nathan held that the rule against double jeopardy does not prevent the Law Society from initiating a second set of professional disciplinary proceedings based on the same factual matrix as the first if the first had only terminated at the inquiry committee stage. In addition, it held that the initiation of a second set of proceedings based on the same factual matrix was not an abuse of process This article seeks to argue that the rule against double jeopardy should operate to prevent subsequent disciplinary proceedings even if the first set of proceedings had terminated at only the inquiry committee stage. It goes on to argue that the rule against double jeopardy should be triggered by subsequent proceedings based on the same evidence. Alternatively, it argues that the initiation of a second set of proceedings based on the same evidence should be considered as an abuse of process. It concludes by offering some suggestions for reform.

This paper deals with copyright and moral rights issues in the works of Indian national poet, C Subramania Bharati. Its focus is on policy questions, touching on the protection of the artistic integrity of creative works, the democratization of access to literature, the possibility of perpetual moral rights protection in artistic works of exceptional national importance, and the appropriate role of moral rights in developing countries. The analysis will concentrate on Indian copyright law. It will also consider the impact of international copyright developments on the law in India, concluding with a brief critique of international principles in their application to developing countries.

The use of agreements or concerted practices to keep parallel goods out of the European Union may result in a competition-law violation. Regardless of the status of the intellectual property rights embodied in goods first sold outside of the European Economic Area(EEA), the combination of restrictive agreements prohibiting export to the European Union, combined with a selective distribution system within the EEA that is in a position to exploit the resultant higher price in the market, could be found to violate Article 81 of the EC treaty. As the European Court of Justice slowly delineates the complexities of intellectual property exhaustion, the competition-law issues raised by global parallel trade may come to overshadow the intellectual property considerations that have driven Court of Justice jurisprudence.