Template:Did you know nominations/Errors as to precedent facts in Singapore law

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Errors as to precedent facts in Singapore law

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that in a 1998 case the Singapore Court of Appeal held the Internal Security Act contained no precedent facts as Parliament clearly intended that detention decisions were to be made by the Government?

• Reviewed: MV Spiegelgracht
• Comment: The article was moved from a sandbox on 23 January 2012. The hook is referenced by footnotes 29, 32 and 33.

Created/expanded by Aleksgeo (talk), Csteo2009 (talk), Gladchoo (talk), Jiehui.ang.2009 (talk), Niktoh (talk), and Wlchew.2009 (talk). Nominated by Smuconlaw (talk) at 17:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

• Much effort and research has gone into this article. It seems good to me including length, date of creation and sourcing. Hook also seems satisfactory as far as I can see. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:14, 9 February 2012 (UTC)