Vellama v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of By-Election Timing in Hougang SMC
In Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General, the High Court of Singapore heard a judicial review application by Vellama concerning the Prime Minister's discretion in calling a by-election for the Hougang Single Member Constituency. Vellama sought a mandatory order and declarations, which were later abandoned in part. The court, presided over by Justice Philip Pillai, dismissed the application and a reserved application, finding no basis to depart from the general rule that costs follow the event, and made no order as to costs for all applications.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
1.3 Case Type
Constitutional
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Judicial review application concerning the Prime Minister's discretion in calling a by-election. The court dismissed the application, finding no basis to order costs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Respondent | Government Agency | Application Dismissed | Won | David Chong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Low Siew Ling of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lim Sai Nei of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Vellama d/o Marie Muthu | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Philip Pillai | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| David Chong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Low Siew Ling | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Sai Nei | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| M Ravi | LF Violet Netto |
4. Facts
- The Speaker of Parliament announced a vacancy in the Hougang SMC seat.
- The Applicant sought a Mandatory Order to compel the Prime Minister to call a by-election.
- The Prime Minister announced his intention to call a by-election but did not specify the timing.
- The writ of election was issued after the judicial review application was filed.
- The Applicant abandoned her application for the Mandatory Order.
- The court determined it had no power under O 53 to grant standalone declarations.
- The Reserved Application was dismissed as the Constitution does not require the Prime Minister to call a by-election.
5. Formal Citations
- Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General, Originating Summons No 196 of 2012/G, [2012] SGHC 221
- Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General, , [2012] SGHC 155
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Speaker of Parliament announced Hougang SMC seat vacant. | |
| Applicant filed Originating Summons No 196 of 2012/G. | |
| Applicant filed Statement pursuant to O 53 r 1(2). | |
| Prime Minister announced intention to call by-election. | |
| Leave granted to Applicant to proceed with Substantive Application. | |
| Attorney-General appealed decision to grant leave. | |
| Writ of election issued for Hougang SMC by-election. | |
| Attorney-General withdrew appeal. | |
| By-election held. | |
| Applicant proceeded with Substantive Application by filing Summons No 2639 of 2012. | |
| Attorney-General filed Summons No 2684 of 2012. | |
| Applicant filed Summons No 2711 of 2012. | |
| Applicant filed Summons No 3296 of 2012 and Summons No 3297 of 2012. | |
| Summonses heard; AG's SUM 2684 dismissed; Applicant's SUM 2711 and SUM 3296 dismissed; leave granted to withdraw SUM 3297. | |
| Substantive Application and Reserved Application heard. | |
| Judgment released on judicial review application. | |
| Counsel heard on costs. | |
| Decision Date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Prime Minister's Discretion to Call By-Election
- Outcome: The court held that the Constitution does not require the Prime Minister to call a by-election and that it was within his discretion whether, and if so, when to call a by-election.
- Category: Substantive
- Costs in Judicial Review Proceedings
- Outcome: The court made no order as to costs, considering the public interest dimensions of the case.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2011] 2 SLR 1279
- [2006] EWHC 643 (Admin)
- [2008] 1 WLR 426
8. Remedies Sought
- Mandatory Order
- Declarations
9. Cause of Actions
- Judicial Review
10. Practice Areas
- Constitutional Litigation
- Public Law
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- Government
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2012] SGHC 155 | Singapore | The judgment being appealed. |
| Vellama d/o Marie Muthu v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 1033 | Singapore | Cited for the grounds of decision to grant leave to proceed with the substantive application. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Top Ten Entertainment Pte Ltd | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 1279 | Singapore | Cited for the Baxendale-Walker principle regarding costs against regulators performing a public duty. |
| Re Shankar Alan s/o Anant Kulkarni | Unknown | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 95 | Singapore | Cited for the broad discretionary power of the court in awarding costs. |
| Soon Peng Yam and another (trustees of the Chinese Swimming Club) v Maimon bte Ahmad | Unknown | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR(R) 279 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the overriding concern of the court is to achieve the fairest allocation of costs. |
| R v Lord Chancellor,ex parte Child Poverty Action Group | Unknown | Yes | [1999] 1 WLR 347 | England and Wales | Cited for the underlying common law principles of costs orders in civil and judicial review proceedings. |
| Re Siah Mooi Guat | Unknown | Yes | [1988] 3 MLJ 448 | Singapore | Cited for the application of the general rule that costs follow the event in judicial review proceedings. |
| Teo Soh Lung v Minister for Home Affairs and others | Unknown | Yes | [1990] 1 SLR(R) 347 | Singapore | Cited for the application of the general rule that costs follow the event in judicial review proceedings. |
| Chee Siok Chin and others v Minister for Home Affairs | Unknown | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) 582 | Singapore | Cited for the application of the general rule that costs follow the event in judicial review proceedings. |
| Chng Suan Tze v Minister for Home Affairs and others and other appeals | Unknown | Yes | [1988] 2 SLR(R) 525 | Singapore | Cited as an example where a successful applicant in judicial review proceedings was awarded costs. |
| Baxendale-Walker v Law Society | Unknown | Yes | [2006] EWHC 643 (Admin) | England and Wales | Cited for the public interest rationale for not ordering costs against a public body exercising a regulatory function. |
| Baxendale-Walker v Law Society | Unknown | Yes | [2008] 1 WLR 426 | England and Wales | Cited for refining the rationale for not ordering costs against a public body exercising a regulatory function. |
| New Zealand Maori Council and others v Attorney-General | Privy Council | Yes | [1994] 1 AC 466 | New Zealand | Cited for the relevance of public interest in the award of costs in public law proceedings. |
| Oshlack v Richmond River Council | High Court of Australia | Yes | (1998) 193 CLR 72 | Australia | Cited for the relevance of public interest in the award of costs in public law proceedings. |
| R (Corner House Research) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry | House of Lords | Yes | [2005] 1 WLR 2600 | England and Wales | Cited for the relevance of public interest in the award of costs in public law proceedings. |
| Lim Mey Lee Susan v Singapore Medical Council | High Court | Yes | [2011] SGHC 131 | Singapore | Cited regarding attendance and representation at ex parte leave application hearing. |
| Jeyaretnam Kenneth Andrew v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2012] SGHC 210 | Singapore | Cited regarding attendance and representation at ex parte leave application hearing. |
| Yeap Wai Kong v Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 565 | Singapore | Cited regarding attendance and representation at ex parte leave application hearing. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Government Proceedings Act (Cap 121, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Judicial Review
- Mandatory Order
- By-Election
- Prime Minister's Discretion
- Public Interest
- Costs
- Hougang SMC
- Leave Application
- Substantive Application
- Reserved Application
15.2 Keywords
- Judicial Review
- By-Election
- Prime Minister
- Discretion
- Costs
- Singapore
- Constitution
- Hougang
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Costs | 95 |
| Constitutional Law | 90 |
| Administrative Law | 75 |
| Civil Procedure | 50 |
| Judgments and Orders | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Constitutional Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure