Yuen Wai Loon v Public Prosecutor: Statutory Interpretation of Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act

Yuen Wai Loon, a Malaysian national, appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his conviction under section 18(1) of the Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act (PISAA) for possessing truncheons. Choo Han Teck J allowed the appeal on 10 July 2009, holding that the section was not intended to apply to the general public but rather to those involved in the private investigation or security guard business. The court ordered that the fine be refunded to the appellant.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding conviction under s 18(1) of the Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act. The court allowed the appeal, finding the section not applicable to the general public.

1.7 Decision Date

9 July 2009

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Yuen Wai Loon	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Allowed	Won	Wong Siew Hong
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	Hay Hung Chun

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Choo Han Teck	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Wong Siew Hong	Infinitus Law Corporation
Hay Hung Chun	Attorney-General's Chambers

4. Facts

The Appellant, a Malaysian national, bought truncheons in Phuket, Thailand.
The truncheons were found in his check-in luggage at Singapore Budget Terminal.
The Appellant was charged under section 18(1) of the Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act.
The Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act was repealed and re-enacted as the Private Security Industry Act.
Section 18 was moved to the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act.

5. Formal Citations

Yuen Wai Loon v Public Prosecutor, MA 209/2008, [2009] SGHC 160

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2007-02-28	Appellant's luggage scanned at Singapore Budget Terminal; truncheons detected
2008-02-25	Appellant charged under section 18(1) of the Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act
2009-04-27	Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act repealed
2009-07-10	Judgment reserved

7. Legal Issues

Applicability and scope of section 18 of the Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act
- Outcome: The court held that section 18 was not of general application and did not apply to the appellant.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Whether section 18 was of general application or confined only to specific class of people

8. Remedies Sought

No remedies sought

9. Cause of Actions

No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals

11. Industries

Security

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
PP v Low Kok Heng	High Court	Yes	[2007] 4 SLR 183	Singapore	Cited for the purposive approach in the interpretation of statutes.
Kuai Cheng Yan & Anor v PP	N/A	No	Kuai Cheng Yan & Anor v PP	N/A	Cited as an example where s18 has been used to prosecute individuals who have had prohibited items in their possession without lawful authority.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Section 18 Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act (Cap 249, 1985 Rev Ed)	Singapore
Section 9A(1) of the Interpretation Act (Cap 1, 2002 Rev. Ed.)	Singapore
Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act (Cap 184, 1997 Rev. Ed.)	Singapore
Private Security Industry Act (Cap. 250A)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act
Purposive Interpretation
Statutory Interpretation
Truncheons
Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act

15.2 Keywords

Private Investigation and Security Agencies Act
Statutory Interpretation
Truncheons
Singapore
Criminal Law

16. Subjects

Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law
Security Law

17. Areas of Law

Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law