Judgment Header
Public Prosecutor v Mas Swan bin Adnan and another [2011] SGHC 107
Court DecisionSGHC
[2011] SGHC 107
[2011] SGHC 107
General Division of the High Court of Singapore29 Apr 2011Criminal Case No 22 of 2010
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 3 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
3Later cases and laws citing this decision
“ase” because “the inference of knowledge is irresistible and is the only rational inference available on the facts” [emphasis in original] (see also Public Prosecutor v Mas Swan bin Adnan and another [2011] SGHC 107 at [55]; Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other matters [2014] 3 SLR 721 at [76]; Obe”
“immediate reference to the particular matter in question and not simply be evidence of general disposition or a tendency to do the act in question (Public Prosecutor v Mas Swan bin Adnan and another [2011] SGHC 107 (“Mas Swan”) at [109]; see also Pinsler at para 3.016). Purported evidence that Mr Dawkins was in the hab”
“he issues in question before reaching any conclusion. In making this observation I am mindful of the statement of Steven Chong J (as he then was) in Public Prosecutor v Mas Swan bin Adnan and another [2011] SGHC 107 at [107] that following Law Society of Singapore v Tan Guat Neo Phyllis [2008] 2 SLR(R) 239, admissibili”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: Criminal Case No 22 of 2010
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2011-04-29
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.