Judgment Header
Shadrake Alan v Attorney-General [2011] SGCA 26
Loading…
[2011] SGCA 26
Court of Appeal of Singapore27 May 2011Civil Appeal No 212 of 2010
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 3 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Later cases and laws citing this decision
“the court has to go on to consider whether that real risk has been established (at common law). In Gary K Y Chan, “Contempt of Court and Fair Criticism in Singapore: Shadrake Alan v Attorney General [2011] SGCA 26” (2011) 11(2) Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal 197 at p 206, the author appeared to assume the l”
“1 to clause 3(1) establishes that fair criticism does not amount to scandalising the court. This is in accordance with the provisional view of the Court of Appeal in Shadrake Alan v Attorney-General [2011] SGCA 26 that fair criticism goes towards liability for contempt of court. In accordance with this approach, Part 4”
“enser– Wilkinson J; AG v The Times Newspapers Ltd [1974] AC 273; Reg v Duffy & Ors; ex p Nash [1960] 2 QB 188 at 200; Au Wai Pang v Attorney-General [2015] SGCA 61; Shadrake Alan v Attorney-General [2011] SGCA 26 (‘Shadrake Alan’). 26 [57] In applying the “real risk” test, the court is expected to avoid taking either e”
Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Judgment Header
Shadrake Alan v Attorney-General [2011] SGCA 26
Case Metadata
Case No: Civil Appeal No 212 of 2010
Case Metadata
Court: Court of Appeal of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2011-05-27
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.