Legal Updates for August 2022IMDA Proposes Enhanced Measures to Protect Against SMS Scams
As SMS has become a channel that scammers commonly use to conduct their illicit activities, the Infocomm Media Development Authority ("IMDA") has been working to address the threat of SMS and phone scams. On 15 August 2022, IMDA issued consultation papers on its new proposed measures to further safeguard SMS messages: (a) Mandatory registration with the Singapore SMS Sender ID Registry for all organisations that choose to use Sender IDs to send SMS to Singapore mobile users, and compulsory licensing of aggregators; and (b) Implementation of anti-scam filter solution within mobile networks. Responses to the respective consultations should be submitted to IMDA by 9 September 2022.
The proposed measures will affect businesses and organisations that utilise SMS in their operations, by introducing new registration requirements. They will also require Mobile Network Operators to implement new protective measures within their network. This Update highlights the key points of the consultation papers and the new proposed measures.
Company Directors' Duties on Workplace Safety and Health
On 12 August 2022, the Workplace Safety and Health Council issued a Public Consultation on the proposed Code of Practice ("Code") on Chief Executives' and Board of Directors' Workplace Safety and Health ("WSH") Duties. The proposed Code aims to provide greater clarity and strengthen ownership of the WSH duties of Chief Executives and Board of Directors (collectively known as "Company Directors"). The Code sets out the principles that Company Directors should observe in improving WSH performance and management, as well as the practical measures that can be taken to give effect to these principles.
The Public Consultation closes on 8 September 2022. Company Directors and organisations would be well advised to closely review the provisions in the Code to determine whether and how to respond to the Public Consultation. In this Update, we take a look at some of the issues arising from the proposed Code, as well as its key principles and measures.
MAS Sets Out Enhanced Disclosure and Reporting Guidelines for Retail ESG Funds
Along with the steady rise in investments in Environmental, Social and Governance ("ESG")-related financial products, greenwashing has emerged as a significant regulatory concern. In this regard, it has been reported that there has been a spate of greenwashing allegations against financial institutions offering ESG funds.
In Singapore, to combat greenwashing of retail ESG funds and boost investor confidence, the Monetary Authority of Singapore ("MAS") issued MAS Circular No. CFC 02/2022 ("Circular") on 28 July 2022 setting out enhanced disclosure and reporting requirements/guidelines and shared its expectations on how existing requirements under the Code on Collective Investment Scheme and the Securities and Futures (Offers of Investment) (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations 2005 apply to retail ESG funds. The Circular will take effect on 1 January 2023.
In this Update, we briefly highlight the key requirements and guidelines concerning retail ESG Funds.
Court Determines When It Will Allow the Transfer of Shares in Insolvent Company
When a company commences winding-up, the disposition of its property and the transfer of shares in the company is void under section 130 of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018, unless the Court otherwise orders. Under what conditions will the Court allow such disposition or transfer? This was the question in Ong Boon Chuan v Tong Guan Food Products Pte Ltd [2022] SGHC 181, when the Singapore High Court was faced with an application for the sale and transfer of shares in an insolvent company.
The Court chose to exercise its discretion under section 130 in favour of the applicant, granting the order for sale and transfer. In reaching its decision, the Court set out the applicable principles in determining the exercise of its discretion. This Update provides a summary of the Court's decision and the key points of law regarding the operation of section 130.
Singapore High Court Determines: How Final is a "Final Arbitral Award"?
The finality of an arbitral award is a crucial issue. After all, no party desires to incur further legal costs and expend more time on an outcome that may be re-litigated or otherwise disturbed.
Accordingly, when an arbitrator issues an arbitral award with conditional reliefs, but bearing the title "Final Award", are the parties entitled to rely on it as being final? Has the arbitrator been rendered functus officio (that is, no longer in possession of further authority after completing his/her intended function), or may the arbitrator render a further award?
In York International Pte Ltd v Voltas Ltd [2022] SGHC 153 ("York"), the plaintiff applied under section 21(9) of the Arbitration Act 2001 ("Act") for the Court's decision that the Arbitrator ("Arbitrator") was functus officio after issuing an arbitral award that included certain conditional reliefs. Finding in favour of the plaintiff, the Singapore High Court found that the arbitral award was indeed final and the Arbitrator was functus officio. In coming to its decision, the Court considered the following issues:
- Whether the plaintiff's application fell within section 21(9) of the Act or was otherwise barred;
- If the plaintiff's application was not to be barred, whether the Arbitrator no longer had jurisdiction after the issuance of the award; and
- Whether the defendant's argument that it would have no other recourse to resolve the outstanding issues had any bearing on the Court's decision regarding the arbitrator's jurisdiction to issue a further award.
The plaintiff was successfully represented by Rajah & Tann Singapore's Ng Kim Beng (Deputy Managing Partner; Partner, International Arbitration) and Benny Santoso (Senior Associate, International Arbitration).
Visit Arbitration Asia for insights from our thought leaders across Asia concerning arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, ranging from legal and case law developments to market updates and many more.
Land Betterment Charge Act Takes Effect on 1 August 2022 to Replace Development Charge and Differential Premium
The Land Betterment Charge Act ("LBC Act") has come into operation on 1 August 2022. First passed in Parliament on 10 May 2021 as the Land Betterment Charge Bill, the LBC Act was subsequently published in the Government Gazette on 8 June 2021. It provides for the imposition of a tax (called a Land Betterment Charge or "LBC") on the increase in the value of land resulting from a chargeable consent given in relation to land.
The LBC replaces the Development Charge, Temporary Development Levy and Differential Premium, consolidating these charges and taxes under the Singapore Land Authority. The LBC Act sets out the framework for the operation of the LBC, including the rules for calculating the appliable tax, who is liable for payment, and how the obligation is to be satisfied and enforced. In this Update, we highlight the key features of the LBC Act and the LBC regime and how it differs from the previous regime, as well as what developers should be aware of regarding their liability for payment of LBC.
|
