Judgment Header
Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58
Loading…
[2014] SGCA 58
Court of Appeal of Singapore28 Nov 2014Criminal Appeals Nos 12 of 2012 and 4 of 2013
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Cited in 8 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
“under Exception 7 which must be satisfied before an accused is entitled to rely on it (see the decisions of this court in Ong Pang Siew at [58] and Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 (“Wang Zhijian”) at [50]):”
“or and other matters [2017] 1 SLR 505 (“Iskandar”) at [79], citing Ong Pang Siew v Public Prosecutor [2011] 1 SLR 606 (“Ong Pang Siew”) at [58] and Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 (“Wang Zhijian”) at [50].”
“[2019] 2 SLR 216 (“Nagaenthran”) at [21]; Iskandar, [66] supra at [79]; Ong Pang Siew v Public Prosecutor [2011] 1 SLR 606 (“Ong Pang Siew”) at [58]; Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian (“Wang Zhijian”) [2014] SGCA 58 at [50].”
“In respect of the third limb of Exception 7, as the CA noted in Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 (“Wang Zhijian”) at [67]:”
“or wrong; and (c) if it undermines the person’s ability to exercise will power to control physical acts in accordance with that rational judgment (Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 (“Wang Zhijian”) at [67]; Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2019] 2 S”
“ty set out in R v Byrne [1960] 2 QB 396 (which roughly track the three categories of impairment set out in the current version of Exception 7) (see Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 at [67]; Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2019] 2 SLR 216 at [25]–[”
“t v Public Prosecutor and other matters [2017] 1 SLR 505 (“Iskandar”) at [79], citing Ong Pang Siew v Public Prosecutor [2011] 1 SLR 606 (“Ong Pang Siew”) at [58] and Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian [2014] SGCA 58 at [50]) ought equally to apply in the context of s 33B(3)(b) of the MDA. Under this three-limb test, the”
“ms of the accused person’s “ability to form a rational judgment as to whether an act is right or wrong” [emphasis added]: Byrne at 403, followed in Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58 (“Wang Zhijian”) at [67] and in Ahmed Salim at [35]. However, it is important to bear in mind that the fo”
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
Public Prosecutor v Wang Zhijian and another appeal [2014] SGCA 58
Case Metadata
Case No: Criminal Appeals Nos 12 of 2012 and 4 of 2013
Case Metadata
Court: Court of Appeal of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2014-11-28
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.