Chan Choon Wai v Public Prosecutor: Grave and Sudden Provocation in Murder Case
In Chan Choon Wai v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal against the appellant's conviction for murder. The appellant was convicted of causing the death of his girlfriend. The primary legal issue was whether the defense of grave and sudden provocation applied. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant had not proven the elements necessary to establish the defense of grave and sudden provocation.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Chan Choon Wai was convicted of murder. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal, rejecting his defense of grave and sudden provocation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Amarjit Singh of Deputy Public Prosecutors Karen Loh of Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Chan Choon Wai | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| L P Thean | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Amarjit Singh | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Karen Loh | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Vinit Chhabra | Edmund Pereira & Partners |
| Christopher Yap | Christopher Yap & Co |
| Edmund Pereira | Edmund Pereira & Partners |
4. Facts
- The appellant and the deceased were lovers.
- The deceased began seeing another man, Sam.
- The appellant was upset by the deceased's relationship with Sam.
- The deceased told the appellant she preferred Sam because he had better career prospects.
- The appellant strangled the deceased.
- The appellant cut his wrists after strangling the deceased.
- The appellant initially claimed the deceased asked him to strangle her as part of a suicide pact.
5. Formal Citations
- Chan Choon Wai v Public Prosecutor, Cr App 3/2000, [2000] SGCA 32
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Death of Koh Mew Chin | |
| Appellant arrested | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Grave and Sudden Provocation
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant had not proven both the subjective and objective elements required to establish the defense of grave and sudden provocation.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Loss of self-control
- Objective assessment of provocation
- Related Cases:
- Virsa Singh v State of Punjab (1958) AIR SC 465
- Tan Jo Cheng v PP [1992] 1 SLR 620
- Koh Swee Beng v PP [1991] 3 MLJ 401
- PP v Kwan Cin Cheng [1998] 2 SLR 345
- Lau Lee Peng v PP [2000] 2 SLR 628
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Murder
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virsa Singh v State of Punjab | Supreme Court | Yes | Virsa Singh v State of Punjab (1958) AIR SC 465 | India | Cited for the principle that for a charge under s 300(c), it is not necessary to show that the accused intended to cause the death; all that must be proved is that the accused intended to inflict the particular bodily injury and that injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. |
| Tan Jo Cheng v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | Tan Jo Cheng v PP [1992] 1 SLR 620 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that for a charge under s 300(c), it is not necessary to show that the accused intended to cause the death; all that must be proved is that the accused intended to inflict the particular bodily injury and that injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. |
| Koh Swee Beng v PP | Unknown | Yes | Koh Swee Beng v PP [1991] 3 MLJ 401 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that the burden was on the appellant to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that his case fell within exception 1. |
| PP v Kwan Cin Cheng | High Court | Yes | PP v Kwan Cin Cheng [1998] 2 SLR 345 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that in order for an accused to successfully plead the defence of provocation, two elements must be proved: the subjective requirement that he was in fact deprived of his self-control by the provocation and the objective requirement that the provocation is grave and sudden. |
| Lau Lee Peng v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | Lau Lee Peng v PP [2000] 2 SLR 628 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that in order for an accused to successfully plead the defence of provocation, two elements must be proved: the subjective requirement that he was in fact deprived of his self-control by the provocation and the objective requirement that the provocation is grave and sudden. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| s 300 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Grave and sudden provocation
- Strangulation
- Suicide pact
- Loss of self-control
- Jealousy
15.2 Keywords
- murder
- provocation
- criminal law
- singapore
- appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Murder | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Grave and Sudden Provocation | 90 |
| Offences | 80 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Evidence | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Murder
- Provocation