Witholding of an employee’s salary

Singapore’s employment law mandates that salary must be promptly paid to resigning employees even if the employee had wronged the employer; this is a strict position with only a few rare exceptions allowed.  Further, the courts have clarified that any wrong caused by a resigning employee is a separate matter. As a separate matter, the proper recourse by the employer to right any such wrong would be to take legal action against the employee under the terms of the employment contract. 

The Endgame of Section 377A Litigation: Case note on Tan Seng Kee v Attorney-General [2022] SGCA 16

*By: Don Ho Jia Hao I. IntroductionThis case is the latest instalment of more than a decade of litigation on the constitutionality of s 377A of the Penal Code (“PC”).[1] Section 377A provides:Outrages on decency377A. Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure … Continue reading The Endgame of Section 377A Litigation: Case note on Tan Seng Kee v Attorney-General [2022] SGCA 16

A Non-parent’s Maintenance Obligation

Imagine you marry someone with a child from a prior relationship. Initially, you do not mind caring for this child. Then, your marriage sours and you no longer want anything to do with your spouse or the child. However, can your initial conduct of caring for the child unknowingly saddle you with a legal obligation to maintain him/her even when you may not want to? The answer is yes.

Shareholders vs Mismanagement by Directors: The power of a Statutory Derivative Action

Usually, a company would have a legal claim against such misbehaving directors. However, the directors of a company are the ones who decide when the company takes legal action. Does this mean the company is left helpless to claim for its losses from these directors? Thankfully not. As a shareholder, although you are typically unable to cause the company to take legal action, the law provides an exception to this rule under Section 216A of the Companies Act. This is called the “statutory derivative action”.

Breaking the Cycle of At-Risk Behaviour in Youths: Singapore’s 2020 Family Guidance Order

Children and young persons who engage in activities that put them at risk of committing criminal offences often come under fire for their behavioural issues. However, can all at-risk behaviour be attributed to youths themselves? The introduction of the Family Guidance Order (FGO) in 2020 marked a shift in Singapore's stance on this issue. It recognised the dual importance of reducing the blame on the recalcitrant youth and addressing poor parent-child relationships.