Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor: Review of Culpable Homicide Sentence
The Court of Appeal of Singapore dismissed Lim Ghim Peow's application for review of his sentence for culpable homicide, where he had doused his ex-lover with petrol and set her ablaze. The court, comprising Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, Tay Yong Kwang JA, and Chao Hick Tin SJ, found the application to be without merit and an attempt to mount a 'back-door' appeal, violating the review process.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal dismissed Lim Ghim Peow's application for review of his culpable homicide sentence, finding no miscarriage of justice.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Application dismissed | Won | Norine Tan Yan Ling of Attorney-General’s Chambers Francis Ng Yong Kiat of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Ghim Peow | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Chao Hick Tin | Senior Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Norine Tan Yan Ling | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Francis Ng Yong Kiat | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- The Applicant pleaded guilty to culpable homicide for causing the death of his ex-lover.
- The Applicant doused his ex-lover with petrol and set her ablaze.
- The Applicant admitted to the statement of facts without qualification.
- The Applicant sought to have his case 'reheard' on the basis that his sentence was excessive.
- The Applicant alleged inaccuracies in the statement of facts and negligence by his former counsel.
- The Applicant claimed the Judge discriminated against him due to his past involvement with secret societies.
5. Formal Citations
- Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 7 of 2020, [2020] SGCA 104
- Public Prosecutor v Lim Ghim Peow, , [2014] 2 SLR 522
- Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor, , [2014] 4 SLR 1287
- Kreetharan s/o Kathireson v Public Prosecutor and other matters, , [2020] SGCA 91
- Syed Suhail bin Syed Zin v Public Prosecutor, , [2020] SGCA 101
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment delivered | |
| Appeal against sentence dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Review of Sentence
- Outcome: The court held that the application did not meet the threshold for review under the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to comply with statutory procedure
- Insufficient material to demonstrate miscarriage of justice
- Related Cases:
- [2020] SGCA 91
- [2016] 3 SLR 135
- [2020] SGCA 101
- Culpable Homicide
- Outcome: The applicant had pleaded guilty to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Review of Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Culpable Homicide
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Criminal Law Review
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kreetharan s/o Kathireson v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 91 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that applications failing to adhere to proper procedure are liable to being summarily dismissed. |
| Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 135 | Singapore | Cited regarding the need to balance the rights and interests of all persons who utilise scarce judicial resources in review applications. |
| Syed Suhail bin Syed Zin v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 101 | Singapore | Cited regarding the requirements for material to be considered sufficient for a review application. |
| Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 1287 | Singapore | Cited as the earlier decision in the same case, which the applicant sought to review. |
| Public Prosecutor v Lim Ghim Peow | High Court | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 522 | Singapore | Cited as the High Court decision where the applicant was originally sentenced. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 304(a) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394H(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394H(7) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394J(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394J(3) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394J(4) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Culpable Homicide
- Review Application
- Miscarriage of Justice
- Statement of Facts
- Leave Application
- Criminal Procedure Code
15.2 Keywords
- culpable homicide
- criminal review
- sentence
- appeal
- Singapore
- court of appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Culpable Homicide | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 85 |
| Sentencing | 80 |
| Criminal Procedure | 80 |
| Appeal | 75 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Sentencing
- Appeals
- Criminal Review