Protesting is a declaration of objection, disapproval, often in opposition to something a person (group) is powerless to prevent or avoid. In this case, the protestors were greedy and went on strike in the hopes of getting shorter hours and better pay. In addition, other drivers were involved voluntarily and involuntarily, feeling like that they had an obligation to protest. The issue of this question is to determine the offences committed by the China national train drivers under Singapore law. The laws they broke include the breach of contract, conspiracy (tort law), duress and disrupting the essential services of country (Singapore). A breach of contract is committed when a party of the contract repudiates his liability under the contract before the time of performance is due; i.e. the failure to perform as stated in the contract. Repudiation of a contract occurs when a party to a contract, by words or by conduct, intimates to the other that he no longer intends to be bound by the contract. Repudiation can be Actual or Anticipatory- Actual: a willful act of breach; Anticipatory: a declaration in advance with regards to non-performance, making future performance impossible: Hochster v De La Tour (1853); Synge v Synge (1894). Conspiracy, or the Tort of Conspiracy is committed when two or more persons agree, on a course of conduct, to harm another. Four elements are essential in the establishment of conspiracy. First, there must be a combination of two or more persons, and an agreement between them to carry out certain acts; second, should the conspiracy include lawful acts, then the main purpose of the conspirators must be to cause damage or injury to the plaintiff; if the conspiracy involves unlawful means, then such a main purpose is of no need. Thirdly, the acts must be performed in furtherance of the agreement and lastly, the plaintiff must have suffered damage: Wu Yang Construction Group Ltd v Zhejiang Jinyi Group Co Ltd (2006). Duress is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document