Cheng Swee Tiang v PP

JurisdictionMalaysia
CourtHigh Court (Malaysia)
Year1964

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
13 cases
8 books & journal articles
  • THE COURT'S DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES AND EMERGING IMPLICATIONS IN THE CRIMINAL SPHERE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2016, December 2016
    • 1 Diciembre 2016
    ...(LexisNexis, 5th Ed, 2015) at paras 6.056–6.059. 86Ie, since the judgment of the High Court in Cheng Swee Tiang v Public Prosecutor[1964] MLJ 291 (see para 4 above). 87ANB v ANC[2015] 5 SLR 522 at [27]–[31]. 88ANB v ANC[2015] 5 SLR 522 at [27]–[31]. 89 As is evident from the heading above p......
  • THE CASE FOR DEPARTING FROM THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE AGAINST PRIOR NEGOTIATIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS IN SINGAPORE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • 1 Diciembre 2013
    ...t p 1573. 110Law Society of Singapore v Tan Guat Neo Phyllis[2008] 2 SLR(R) 239 at [126]. 111 See Cheng Swee Tiang v Public Prosecutor[1964] MLJ 291; Ajmer Singh v Public Prosecutor[1985–1986] SLR(R) 1030; How Poh Sun v Public Prosecutor[1991] 2 SLR(R) 270; and SM Summit Holdings Ltd v Publ......
  • ADMISSIBILITY AND THE DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • 1 Diciembre 2013
    ...at [126]). It referred to Chan Chi Pun v Public Prosecutor[1994] 1 SLR(R) 654, which approved Cheng Swee Tiang v Public Prosecutor[1964] MLJ 291 (Phyllis at [103]). For a fuller account of the approach in Phyllis to former authorities, see Jeffrey Pinsler, Evidence and the Litigation Proces......
  • APPROACHES TO THE EVIDENCE ACT: THE JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A CODE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2002, December 2002
    • 1 Diciembre 2002
    ...Proof in Criminal Justice”(1992) 4 SAcLJ 267; Michael Hor, “The Presumption of Innocence”[1995] SJLS 365. 29 See main text at note 21. 30 [1964] MLJ 291. 31 This was a magistrate’s appeal first heard by Tan Ah Tah J. On the application of the appellant, the case was ordered to be heard befo......
  • Get Started for Free