Singapore legislation

Regulation 4

of Singapore Armed Forces (SAVER Plan) Regulations

Regulation 4

Awards Appeal Tribunal

Amended byS 162/2008 wef 01/04/2008S 835/2024 wef 01/11/2024S 835/2024 wef 01/11/2024

Subregulation 1

For the purposes of these Regulations, the Armed Forces Council may also appoint an Awards Appeal Tribunal which shall consist of not less than 3 members.

Subregulation 2

Amended byS 162/2008 wef 01/04/2008

The Tribunal shall have power to vary any award made under these Regulations (other than an award to which regulation 4A relates), whether by increasing or decreasing such award, and the decision of the Tribunal thereon shall be final and conclusive.

Subregulation 2A

Amended byS 835/2024 wef 01/11/2024

The Tribunal may regulate its own procedure for the conduct of an appeal under this regulation, including any proceedings leading up to the hearing of the appeal.

Subregulation 3

Amended byS 835/2024 wef 01/11/2024

Without affecting paragraph (2A), the Tribunal shall have power —

(a)

to call for any document relating to the appellant’s service from an Officer-in-charge of Records or to order the appellant to undergo a medical examination by a medical officer to be appointed by the Tribunal in any particular case; and

(b)

to certify to an Officer-in-charge of Records any reasonable travelling and other expenses which may have been incurred by any person in appearing before the Tribunal or before any medical officer appointed to make a medical examination of such person under this regulation.

Subregulation 4

Every appellant shall have the right to appear before the Tribunal in person, or by a representative, but the Tribunal may hear and determine any appeal in the absence of the appellant.

Subregulation 5

Every appeal under this regulation shall be brought within 12 months of the date on which the decision of an Awards Officer is notified to the appellant but the Tribunal may allow an appeal to be brought after the expiration of the period limited by this regulation if it considers that there was a reasonable excuse for the delay.