Bill Passed in Parliament to Clarify that Egregious Abuses of Court Processes Amount to Contempt

On 14 October 2024, the Ministry of Law (“MinLaw“) introduced the Administration of Justice (Protection) (Amendment) Bill (“AOJP Bill“) for First Reading in Parliament. The Bill was introduced for Second Reading in Parliament and passed on 13 November 2024.  

The AOJP Bill seeks to amend the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act 2016 (“AOJP Act“), which provides that any act that interferes with, or obstructs, the administration of justice is punishable as contempt.

The proposed amendments will clarify that egregious abuses of court processes (e.g. “lawfare”, being the commencing of unmeritorious claims to oppress others and/or for ulterior purposes) will amount to contempt, thereby safeguarding the administration of justice. Such cases are becoming more common in Singapore and overseas and must be deterred as they can: (i) undermine the court’s authority and impede the administration of justice; (ii) impact the legal system’s reputation and erode trust in the court system; and (iii) cause financial and psychological harm to individuals who are forced to defend unmeritorious claims. Examples of such abuses include commencing civil proceedings known to be without foundation to seek financial damages for the purpose of oppressing the defendant, filing fictitious claims for the purpose of delaying criminal proceedings, and persistently commencing actions and making manifestly groundless applications.

The proposed amendments will cover all court proceedings in Singapore and provide that the following conduct will amount to contempt:

  1. Conducting or commencing a court proceeding, which the person knows or ought to have known: (i) involves a deception on the court, or is fictitious, or constitutes a mere sham; or (ii) is manifestly groundless or without foundation, and involves the process of the court being employed for some ulterior or improper purpose.
  1. Conducting or commencing multiple or successive court proceedings, which the person knows or ought to have known are manifestly groundless or without foundation.
  1. Causing or abetting such conduct.

The following clarifications are pertinent:

  1. The proposed amendments are clarificatory in nature, and do not lower the current threshold for contempt.
  1. The proposed amendments will not cover: (i) the typical case of a civil matter that is struck off for the sole reason that it has no merit; or (ii) cases that can be adequately dealt with by striking out and costs orders.
  1. Litigants and lawyers who act with reasonable care and in good faith will not be penalised.
  1. Ultimately, the court will be able to examine the circumstances of the case, when considering whether the conduct constitutes contempt.

Click on the following link for more information:


Disclaimer

Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of member firms with local legal practices in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Our Asian network also includes our regional office in China as well as regional desks focused on Brunei, Japan and South Asia. Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local requirements.

The contents of this publication are owned by Rajah & Tann Asia together with each of its member firms and are subject to all relevant protection (including but not limited to copyright protection) under the laws of each of the countries where the member firm operates and, through international treaties, other countries. No part of this publication may be reproduced, licensed, sold, published, transmitted, modified, adapted, publicly displayed, broadcast (including storage in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently for any purpose save as permitted herein) without the prior written permission of Rajah & Tann Asia or its respective member firms.

Please note also that whilst the information in this publication is correct to the best of our knowledge and belief at the time of writing, it is only intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be treated as legal advice or a substitute for specific professional advice for any particular course of action as such information may not suit your specific business and operational requirements. You should seek legal advice for your specific situation. In addition, the information in this publication does not create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on the information in this publication.

CONTACTS

Head, Dispute Resolution
+65 6232 0427
Singapore,
Deputy Head, Dispute Resolution
+65 6535 3600
Singapore, South Asia,

Country

EXPERTISE

Share

Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of legal practices based in Asia.

Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local legal requirements. Services provided by a member firm are governed by the terms of engagement between the member firm and the client.

This website is solely intended to provide general information and does not provide any advice or create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on this website.

© 2024 Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP. All rights reserved. Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP (UEN T08LL0005E) is registered in Singapore under the Limited Liability Partnerships Act (Chapter 163A) with limited liability.