Lord Maugham:-

This is an appeal from an order of the Court of appeal of the Straits Settlements (Settlement of Singapore), dated 1st August 1935. By the judgments of the majority of the Court (Thomas, C. J., Federated Malay States, and Terrell, J., Burton, Ag. C. J. dissenting) the appeal of the respondents from the judgment of Sir Walter Clarence Huggard, C. J., dated 2nd April 1935, was allowed with costs and the order made by him was reversed. In the result a writ of prohibition which had been directed to issue by the trial Judge was set aside.

The appellants, the Estate and Trust Agencies (1927) Limited are the owners of a house known as Municipal No. 543, North Bridge Road, Singapore. The respondents, the Singapore Improvement Trust are a corporate body constituted by the Singapore Improvement Ordinance 1927 and entrusted (by S. 4) with the duty of carrying out the provisions of that Ordinance. The proceedings were commenced by the appellants by summons in the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements (Settlement of Singapore) asking for the issue of a writ of prohibition directed to the respondents to prohibit them from further proceedings in respect of a declaration made by the respondents on 11th December 1933, that a large block of 97 houses including the appellants' said house were insanitary within the meaning of S. 57 of the said Ordinance. The Singapore Improvement Ordinance, 1927, is divided into parts, Part 5, (Ss. 57 to 63 inclusive) deals with Insanitary Buildings and Part 6 (Ss. 64 to 102) deals with Improvement Schemes. The following sections are very material:

57. Whenever it appears to the Board that within its administrative area any building which is used or is intended or is likely to be used as a dwelling place is of such a construction or is in such a condition as to be unfit for human habitation, the Board may by resolution declare such building to be insanitary.

By S. 58 (2) (as amended by the Amendment Act 13 of 1930) it is provided that when a declaration under S. 57 has been made the owner of a building in respect of which a declaration has been made may within one month deliver to the Chairman an objection in writing to such declaration : and by S. 58 (5) the objector shall be furnished with a statement in writing "of the grounds on which the Board made the declaration."

59. (1) After consideration of all objections the Board may revoke any declaration made under S. 57 or may submit it to the Governor in Council. (2) Every declaration submitted under this section to the Governor in Council shall be accompanied by : (a) the reports, statements or matters upon which the Board acted: (b) such objections as have been made to the declaration; (c) any evidence which the objector may have produced before the Board; (d) a schedule showing the way in which the Board has dealt with each such objection. (3) If no objection has been made to the declaration or if any objection made has been withdrawn, the Governor in Council shall approve the declaration. (4) If any objection has been made and not withdrawn, the Governor in Council shall inform the objector and the Board of a time and place at which they may be heard. (5) At such hearing the Board may appear by one of its officers or by an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court and the objector may appear as provided in S. 58 (4). (6) Each party may at the discretion of the Governor in Council adduce further evidence. (7) After hearing the parties, or such of them as may appear the Governor in Council may make an order approving or revoking the declaration.

Section 60 (as amended):

60. (1) Every order made by the Governor in Council under sub-s. (3) or (7), S. 59 shall be notified. The Board shall thereupon cause a memorandum to be presented to the Registrar of Deeds containing a complete list of all the lands affected by such order, and the Registrar shall note in the register against all such lands the fact that such order has been made. (2) Upon such note b