Singapore's Public Law

1. Introduction

This essay measures the adequacy of Singapore’s personal property security law against the objective benchmark of how far it realizes purposes that it is intended to realize. It further examines whether a better alternative to Singapore’s personal property security law may be had by undertaking reform along the lines of that suggested in Reform of the Bills of Sale (1996) LRC 1 (“Report”).

To begin, in section 2, it establishes three broad purposes that Singapore’s personal property security law is intended to realize. Next, in section 3, it demonstrates that Singapore’s personal property security law is inadequate because it does not go far enough in realizing these three purposes. Finally, in section 4, it argues that a reformed law along the lines of the Report allows Singapore’s personal property security law to go further in realizing these three purposes; it is therefore a better alternative that should be had.

2. Purposes of Singapore’s personal property security law

Singapore’s personal property security law is intended to realize three broad purposes.

2.1 Protection of the debtor’s interest

One purpose is to protect the interest of the debtor in a secured credit financing arrangement. This is evident from the Bills of Sales Act (Cap 24, 1985 Rev Ed) (“BOSA”) which is acknowledged to have been enacted to protect “needy debtors who might otherwise be pressured into giving (security on) a bill of sale without fully comprehending its nature and consequences.”

2.2 Protection of the creditor’s interest

Another purpose is to protect the interest of the creditor in a secured credit financing arrangement. There are two sub-purposes to this end.

The first sub-purpose is to eliminate false impressions of “wealth” that arise where a debtor is allowed to remain in possession of personal property that he/she had already encumbered in a prior arrangement. This is to protect, in particular, other potential creditors who may be misled into supplying credit on these false impressions of “wealth”. This sub-purpose is evident from the registration regime in the Companies Act (Cap 50, 2006 Rev Ed) (“CA”) which is recognized to have been enacted to “provide intended creditors with ready means of checking on the borrower’s financial affairs” , presumably so that they will not be misled by false impressions of “wealth”.

The second sub-purpose is to have “efficient and effective laws that provide for consistent, predictable outcomes for secured creditors in the event of non-performance by debtors.” This is to protect creditors by ensuring that they are at all times able to “assess