|
Always revitalising and evolving |
|
About the project The Singapore Academy of Law’s Law Reform Committee examined the parol evidence rule, which provides that when a transaction is recorded in a document, it is generally not permissible to adduce extrinsic evidence of the transaction, that is, evidence of (1) the terms of the transaction, (2) terms not included in the document expressly or by reference, or (3) a party’s intended meaning. These distinct rules are reflected in sections 93 to 102 of the Evidence Act (Chapter 97, 1997 Revised Edition). Although abolition of the rule had been recommended by the Law Commission of England and Wales and the Law Reform Commission in British Columbia, the Committee felt that the rule continues to serve a useful function and should be retained. It recommended that aspects of the rule in the Evidence Act should be refined, including clarifying the rule’s scope of application, the relationship between sections 93 and 94, the applicability of common law exceptions to the rule, and the relationship between provisions dealing with the construction of documents (section 94(f) and sections 95 to 100). It was also of the view that extrinsic proof of collateral contracts should be allowed, even where this is inconsistent with a written agreement. Project status: Completed
|
Areas of law Click on the image above to view the report |
