Tan Wei Wen v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Dismissed, No Further Appeal in Criminal Matters
In Tan Wei Wen v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore dismissed applications by Tan Wei Wen, who was appealing the High Court's decision in MA 9129, which had upheld the District Judge's dismissal of his application for compensation. The Court of Appeal, comprising Judith Prakash JCA, Tay Yong Kwang JCA, and Belinda Ang JCA, held that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters and no appeal lies against the decision of a judge sitting in the High Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, the court dismissed his applications for an extension of time to appeal, permission to reopen the case, and permission to refer a question of law.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Applications dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal dismissed Tan Wei Wen's applications, affirming that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters. No appeal lies against a High Court judge's appellate decision.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Applications dismissed | Won | David Menon of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Wei Wen | Applicant | Individual | Applications dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| David Menon | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- The applicant was charged with two counts of insulting the modesty of a woman.
- The charges involved sending videos of a male stroking his penis to the complainant.
- The Prosecution withdrew the charges, and the applicant was granted a discharge amounting to an acquittal.
- The applicant sought compensation from the Prosecution, claiming the prosecution was wrongful and malicious.
- The District Court dismissed the applicant's application for compensation.
- The High Court Judge dismissed the applicant's appeal against the DJ’s decision.
- The applicant filed applications seeking to appeal, review, or refer a question of law to the Court of Appeal.
5. Formal Citations
- Tan Wei Wen v Public Prosecutor, , [2023] SGCA 34
- Tan Wei Wen v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 1 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No 1 of 2023
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Applicant allegedly sent a video to the complainant. | |
| Applicant allegedly sent another video to the complainant. | |
| Applicant was charged in the District Court. | |
| Prosecution applied to withdraw the charges against the applicant. | |
| District Court granted the applicant a discharge amounting to an acquittal. | |
| Prosecution sent a letter to the applicant explaining the evidence against him. | |
| Applicant sought compensation from the Prosecution. | |
| District Judge dismissed the applicant’s application for compensation. | |
| Applicant filed an appeal in MA 9129. | |
| Applicant filed CA/CM 7/2023. | |
| Applicant filed CA/CM 8/2023. | |
| Applicant filed CA/CCA 1/2023. | |
| Applicant responded to the court's inquiry regarding CCA 1. | |
| Court of Appeal hearing. | |
| Court of Appeal issued grounds of decision. |
7. Legal Issues
- Reopening Concluded Decisions
- Outcome: The court held that the applicant's application to reopen the concluded case was not properly before the court.
- Category: Procedural
- Single Tier of Appeal in Criminal Matters
- Outcome: The court affirmed that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters and no appeal lies against the decision of a judge sitting in the High Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Related Cases:
- [2021] SGCA 79
- [2021] 2 SLR 942
- [2015] 3 SLR 717
- Frivolous or Vexatious Prosecution
- Outcome: The court found that the applicant had not shown that the prosecution was frivolous or vexatious.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2021] 5 SLR 860
- Reference of Question of Law
- Outcome: The court found that the question of law raised by the applicant did not meet the requirements for a reference to the Court of Appeal.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2021] 2 SLR 942
8. Remedies Sought
- Compensation
- Reversal of High Court decision
- Review of High Court decision
- Reference of a question of law to the Court of Appeal
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appellate Practice
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] SGCA 79 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters. |
| Tang Keng Lai v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 2 SLR 942 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters and cautioning against using the reference procedure to circumvent the single tier of appeals. |
| Public Prosecutor v Lim Yong Soon Bernard | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 717 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that there is only one tier of appeal in criminal matters. |
| Parti Liyani v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2021] 5 SLR 860 | Singapore | Cited for the principles regarding frivolous or vexatious prosecution and the burden of proof on the applicant. |
| Tan Wei Wen v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Magistrate Court | No | [2022] SGMC 44 | Singapore | Cited as the District Judge's decision which was appealed in MA 9129. |
| Lim Hong Kheng v PP | High Court | Yes | [2006] 3 SLR(R) 358 | Singapore | Cited for the factors to consider when granting an extension of time to file a Notice of Appeal and a Petition of Appeal. |
| Houda v The State of New South Wales | Supreme Court of New South Wales | No | [2005] NSWSC 1053 | New South Wales | Cited by the applicant in his email of 24 May 2023 in relation to whether the prosecution in this case is malicious so as to rightfully commence civil claim against the prosecution. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 509 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 359(3) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 397 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 394H(6)(b) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 (2020 Rev Ed) Sections 49(1) read with 60D | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 380(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Criminal appeal
- Frivolous prosecution
- Vexatious prosecution
- Discharge amounting to an acquittal
- Compensation order
- Reference of question of law
- Single tier of appeal
- Appellate jurisdiction
15.2 Keywords
- Criminal procedure
- Appeal
- Frivolous prosecution
- Vexatious prosecution
- Reopening concluded decisions
- Criminal reference
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Procedure | 90 |
| Sentencing | 90 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Litigation | 30 |
| Civil Litigation | 30 |
| Civil Procedure | 30 |
| Administrative Law | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Appeals
- Sentencing