MV Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor
| Jurisdiction | Singapore |
| Judgment Date | 08 July 1998 |
| Date | 08 July 1998 |
| Docket Number | Criminal Motion No 9 of 1998 |
| Court | High Court (Singapore) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
27 cases
-
Siti Hajar bte Abdullah v Public Prosecutor
...Re [1960] MLJ 243 (folld) Knowler v Rennison [1947] 1 KB 488 (refd) Muniandy, Re [1954] MLJ 168 (folld) MV Balakrishnan v PP [1998] 2 SLR (R) 846; [1998] 3 SLR 586 (folld) PP v Mohd Isa [1963] MLJ 135 (folld) Sivakumar s/o Rajoo v PP [2002] 1 SLR (R) 265; [2002] 2 SLR 73 (folld) Sriekaran s......
-
Mohammad Faizal bin Sabtu v PP
...punishments provided in s 33A of the MDA would not apply to them. In this regard, the decision in M V Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor [1998] 2 SLR(R) 846 (“M V Balakrishnan”) is germane. There the court, in dealing with an application to refer two questions pursuant to s 60 of the SCJA, ma......
-
Public Prosecutor v Rozilawaty binte Eddy Rosmanah
...offender himself – this would be the clearest means of giving effect to Parliament’s intention: M V Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor [1998] 2 SLR(R) 846 at [9], and Muhammad Faizal bin Rahim v Public Prosecutor [2012] 1 SLR 116 at [41]. In other words, a special reason is a mitigating or ex......
-
Public Prosecutor v Chinnathambi Gunasekaran
...reasons. See Muhammad Faizal bin Rahim v Public Prosecutor [2012] 1 SLR 116 at [41] to [46], M V Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor [1998] 2 SLR(R) 846 at [9], and Sivakumar s/o Rajoo v Public Prosecutor [2002] 1 SLR(R) 265 at [17] and [25]. See also Prathib s/o M Balan v Public Prosecutor [2......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Criminal Procedure, Evidence and Sentencing
...of the offence’: per Lord Goddard CJ in Whittall v Kirby[1947] KB 194 which has been affirmed by the High Court in MV Balakrishnan v PP[1998] 3 SLR 586. 12.39 It is trite law that the reasons must be special to the offence and not the offender: see Re Kanapathipillai[1960] MLJ 243, PP v Moh......
-
REQUIREMENT OF FAULT IN STRICT LIABILITY
...the meaning of “special reasons” which excuse an offender from the mandatory disqualification order was turned down, MV Balakrishnan v PP[1998] 3 SLR 586. 40 Supra, note 36, at para 3. 41 Ibid, at para 4. For the concept of wilful blindness, see PP v Hla Win[1995] 2 SLR 424, 438, 440 (Yong ......