Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Steven Chong, Tay Yong Kwang, Woo Bih Li |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Procedure and Sentencing |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Ong Ying Ping Esq, Ong Ying Ping, Sarah Siaw, Wong Woon Kwong |
Source: [2024] SGCA 18, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (5)
Case Significance
Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 18 was decided by the Singapore Court of Appeal on 17 May 2024, in Criminal Motion No 20 of 2024. The judgment of the court was delivered by Tay Yong Kwang JCA, sitting with Steven Chong JCA and Woo Bih Li JAD, after the hearing on 14 May 2024. The matter concerned a criminal review. In the application, CA/CM 20/2024 ("CM 20"), the applicant sought an order that Tay Yong Kwang JCA disqualify himself from hearing the summary determination stage in CA/CM 15/2024 ("CM 15") by reason of circumstances said to give rise to a reasonable suspicion or apprehension of bias in the fair-minded and informed observer. The grounds were set out in the supporting affidavit of the applicant's counsel, Mr Ong Ying Ping, dated 2 May 2024. CM 15 was the applicant's earlier, and second, application under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (2020 Rev Ed) for permission to make a review application under s 394I, brought on the basis of new material concerning an alleged miscarriage of justice in Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor and other appeals [2019] SGCA 73; CM 15 had not been decided. The respondent was represented by the Attorney-General's Chambers.
[2024] SGCA 18 explained
Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2024] SGCA 18) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 17 May 2024. It is categorised under Criminal Procedure and Sentencing. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 2 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2024] SGCA 18 about?
Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2024] SGCA 18) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal review”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 18 consider?
The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), Penal Code (Cap 224), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2024] SGCA 18?
Within this corpus, [2024] SGCA 18 has been cited by 2 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.
Summary
In this criminal motion, the applicant, who had been convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to death, sought an order that Tay Yong Kwang JCA disqualify himself from hearing the summary determination stage of an earlier application (CM 15) for permission to make a review application, on the ground of a reasonable suspicion or apprehension of bias. The court held that the judge was entitled to consider and reject the applicant's earlier request and noted that the insistence on successive applications containing essentially the same allegations of bias showed little regard for the seriousness of such allegations. The court dismissed the application (CM 20).
What was Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 18 about?
It was a Singapore Court of Appeal decision dated 17 May 2024 in Criminal Motion No 20 of 2024, in which the applicant sought to have Tay Yong Kwang JCA disqualify himself from hearing CA/CM 15/2024 on the basis of an alleged reasonable apprehension of bias.
Who delivered the judgment in Moad Fadzir v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 18?
Tay Yong Kwang JCA delivered the judgment of the court, sitting with Steven Chong JCA and Woo Bih Li JAD, after the hearing on 14 May 2024. The application related to the applicant's earlier review application CA/CM 15/2024, which had not been decided.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (5)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 18)