The Doctrine of Substantive Legitimate Expectations: The Significance of Chiu Teng@Kallang PTE Ltd. v. Singapore Land Authority

Abstract

The grounds of judicial review have been fixed in Singapore for a significant period of time. These are illegality, irrationality and procedural fairness. Adherence to the principles of the separation of powers has meant that the courts have been reluctant to review the content of the decision outside of irrationality which has been used sparingly and with a high threshold for an applicant to overcome. In addition, the courts have also eschewed proportionality as a ground for judicial review. However, recently in the landmark decision of Chiu Teng@Kallang PTE Ltd. v. Singapore Land Authority the High Court held that it was time to recognise the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectations as a standalone ground of judicial review. Prior to Chiu Teng, the courts in Singapore had been reluctant to explicitly recognise the doctrine other than by way of some form of irrationality review: in the words of the former Chief Justice, Chan Sek Keong, the courts were treading carefully. In this way, Chiu Teng marks a departure from the general reluctance to grapple with the content of a decision. This development echoes developments in other common law jurisdictions. As is usual at any early stage in the law’s development there are a number of questions left to be considered on how the ground of review should evolve over time. This paper focuses on some of the more conceptual questions arising from this development, including how it fits in with existing statements made on substantive review and how the court proposes striking a balance between the applicant and the administration. It will not address some of the more specific practical questions, including, for example whether a legitimate expectation can arise from general policies promulgated by the government (rather than just specific representations) or what kind of detrimental reliance is required to generate a legitimate expectation.

Keywords: Judicial Review, Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Public Law, Legitimate Expectations, Grounds of Review, Grounds for Review, Hong Kong, Singapore