Contributed By Shook Lin & Bok LLP
The key policies, principles and laws governing environmental protection in Singapore have been outlined below.
The key regulatory authorities and bodies responsible for environmental policy and enforcement in Singapore include:
Mechanisms for co-operation with the regulatory authorities include:
“Environmental assets” such as air, freshwater and seawater, soil, flora and fauna, natural habitats, and landscapes in Singapore are protected under various legislation administered by different regulators.
Air
Water and Soil
Sea
Fauna and Flora, Natural Habitats and Landscapes
The potential consequences of breaching environmental protection laws, depending on the nature and seriousness of the breach, include:
To investigate environmental incidents and breaches of environmental law or permits, regulatory authorities have wide-ranging investigative and access powers, including:
Circumstances in which environmental permits are required in Singapore include:
Most applications are made online directly by applicants through government licensing portals such as the GoBusiness Singapore portal.
Appeals from the decisions of regulators to reject applications for permits or subject the issuance of permits to conditions may often be made to the Minister in charge of the Ministry whose purview the regulator comes under. The Minister’s decision is usually final, and avenues to the court for judicial review are sometimes explicitly excluded.
Regulators in Singapore take a comprehensive, whole-of-government approach to environmental policy. They integrate and balance this policy pragmatically with economic and security priorities. Additionally, they coordinate their efforts and resources across various agencies and sectors to achieve synergistic outcomes.
Enforcement is conducted in a graduated manner, focusing on industry consultation and capacity building through briefings, advisories, guidance, and other forms of assistance to facilitate compliance in the first instance.
Enforcement action is proportionate to the gravity of the breach, with warnings issued for technical or administrative lapses, and prosecution, licence suspension/revocation, and/or stop-work orders for serious/repeat breaches.
Detection and investigation of offences and subsequent enforcement are swift to enhance deterrence, and offenders are sometimes named (and shamed) for added deterrence and to signal a low tolerance for egregious breaches.
Environmental permits/approvals are generally issued to a named person, entity, or facility, and are not transferable.
In some instances, a change in ownership of the named permitted or approved entity or facility may necessitate the regulator’s consent for the permit or approval to remain valid; otherwise, a new permit or approval might be required.
The breach of an environmental approval/permit in Singapore may, in some cases, be an offence (eg, under the EPMA and EPHA).
Where it is an offence to carry out an activity without an environmental approval or permit, conducting an activity differently from what has been approved or permitted, or breaching the conditions of the approval or permit, may be considered as engaging in a different activity or conducting it in a manner that has not been approved or permitted; therefore, this could also be deemed an offence.
Administratively, the breach of an environmental approval/permit may also result in the approval/permit being suspended or revoked, or the issuance of a stop work order or an order to carry out remediation works.
Where a security deposit has been required to be provided for a permit (eg, under HWA), the deposit may be forfeited.
The breach of conditions of an approval/permit may also jeopardise the success of future applications for similar approvals/permits.
Polluters
Polluters may be liable in criminal and civil law for environmental damage and/or breaches of environmental law.
They could also be liable in tort for environmental damage (see 10.1 Civil Claims).
Operators
Operators who are not polluters may be criminally liable for causing or permitting discharges/emissions into environmental media.
They could also be liable for environmental damage in tort (see 10.1 Civil Claims) under vicarious liability (as an employer of a polluter who pollutes in the course of employment) or in negligence if the operator assumed a duty of care not to cause environmental damage (eg, as the parent company of a subsidiary that polluted or caused or permitted pollution).
Occupiers
Occupiers may be presumed liable in criminal law for breaches of environmental law on their premises unless they can prove that they did not breach or cause or permit the breach of environmental law (eg, EPMA).
They may also be liable in tort for environmental damage (see 10.1 Civil Claims).
Landowners
Landowners who are not polluters, operators, or occupiers may be liable in tort for environmental damage (see 10.1 Civil Claims):
Contractual Liability
Polluters, operators, occupiers, and landowners may also be liable in contract (eg, under a lease or loan agreement) if they are under a contractual duty to ensure no environmental damage takes place (regardless of how the pollution happened).
Current operators and landowners are not criminally liable for historical environmental incidents or damage unless they are directly involved in, or have caused or permitted, the incident or damage. Nevertheless, landowners may be required to reimburse the regulator (eg, NEA) for the immediate execution of any work within the scope of the legislation which the regulator considers necessary in the case of an emergency to prevent injury or danger to public health or safety or serious pollution of the environment (eg, under EPMA and EPHA).
A landowner seeking planning permission under the PA for a material change of use of land from a pollutive activity to a non-pollutive activity may be required to clean up the historical damage before planning permission is granted (see 12.1 Key Laws Governing Contaminated Land).
Operators, occupiers, and landowners may also be liable in tort for environmental damage caused by third parties (see 5.1 Key Types of Liability).
Environmental offences are generally considered strict liability offences. This means that a lack of intent or fault may not serve as a defence. Instead, a potential defendant can defend themselves by demonstrating that they exercised all due diligence to prevent the prohibited act from occurring.
Common defences for tortious liability include acts of God, statutory authority (for nuisance), and contributory negligence (a partial defence for negligence).
Due diligence and the act of God may also potentially be defences to administrative liability.
Offences by Corporate Entities
In Singapore, environmental legislation commonly states that if a corporate entity commits an offence, a director, manager, secretary, or similar officer of the company is also considered guilty of the same offence. However, the officer can avoid liability if they can demonstrate that the offence by the corporate entity occurred without officer's consent, connivance, or negligence.
Environmental taxes in Singapore include:
Within emission-intensive trade-exposed sectors, the performance on specified energy efficiency or GHG emission intensity benchmarks or decarbonisation plans of a company may be a consideration when the Minister is deciding the number of transitory allowances to award the company under the CPA (the greater the number of transitory allowances awarded to a company, the less carbon tax it must pay for its emissions).
The adoption of sound environmental management systems, as evidenced by voluntary certifications such as ISO 14001, may be considered a form of due diligence and thus a defence against strict liability environmental offences.
Environmental legislation may provide for repeat offenders to be subject to higher maximum punishment than first-time offenders. Judges may also consider higher penalties for repeat environmental offenders.
The general rule is that a company is a separate legal person from its shareholders or parent company. Shareholders and parent companies are therefore generally not liable for the environmental damage or breaches of environmental law.
In exceptional circumstances, courts may “pierce the corporate veil” to hold a shareholder attempting to shelter behind a corporate facade to hide his crime and his benefits from it.
Under the THPA, it is an offence for an entity to participate in the management or operational affairs of another entity that is an owner or occupier of land outside Singapore and engages in conduct that causes or contributes to haze pollution in Singapore at or about the time there is haze pollution in Singapore.
ESG requirements in Singapore have been outlined below.
Owners of buildings with post-2010 planning permission; and owners of “prescribed buildings” (buildings of at least 5,000 m2 excluding residential developments, industrial buildings, railway premises, port services and facilities, and airport services and facilities) that have undergone “major energy-use changes” (ie, the installation, substantial alteration or replacement of a building’s water-cooled/air-cooled chiller) since 2014, must subject their buildings to mandatory periodic energy audits if issued a notice by BCA to do so.
NEA “strongly encourages” HS licensees and permit holders to implement a safety audit procedure in accordance with its Safety Audit Guidelines.
Directors and other officers of a company can also be held personally criminally liable in addition to the company’s criminal liability for an environmental law offence committed by the company. This applies if the company’s offence took place with the consent or knowledge of the director or officer, or if the company’s offence resulted from any actions or failures attributed to the director or officer. In such cases, the director or officer may be subject to the same range of penalties applicable for the offence committed by the company.
Directors and other officers of a company are generally not personally liable for environmental damage caused by the company; however:
Environmental insurance is available in Singapore to cover liabilities such as environmental impairment liability, pollution legal liability, covering risks including:
Generally, there are no mandatory environmental insurance requirements for companies. However, NEA has the authority, with the Minister’s approval, to create regulations that may require owners or occupiers of industrial or trade premises, as well as individuals who handle, store, transport, or use hazardous substances, to obtain and maintain insurance policies under the EPMA.
Before NEA issues an export or import permit for hazardous or other waste, it must be satisfied that the applicant has appropriate insurance (reasonably insured against risks that might arise in relation to the hazardous or other waste concerned, and that the applicant will be able to discharge any liability that might arise in relation to the hazardous or other waste concerned if the permit were granted), per HWA.
Some policies may exclude or limit coverage for fines, penalties, or punitive damages.
Financial institutions (“FIs”) that do not take possession or operational assets are unlikely to be liable for environmental damage or breaches of environmental law.
If FIs take possession or operational control, they may be criminally liable for discharges/emissions of pollutants into environmental media, or for causing or permitting such discharges/emissions. As occupiers of land, they may be presumed to have discharged/emitted pollutants or caused or permitted such discharges/emissions unless they prove to the contrary (eg, under the EPMA). They may also be tortiously liable in negligence or nuisance for environmental damage in the same way as operators or occupiers (see 5.1 Key Types of Liability).
Lenders usually require borrowers to provide contractual representations, warranties, and indemnities regarding compliance with environmental laws. Borrowers must confirm that they are unaware of any existing land contamination, enforcement notices, or ongoing litigation related to liability for environmental damage. Additionally, lenders expect borrowers to maintain adequate environmental insurance to cover any potential contractual liabilities that may arise.
Lenders also require borrowers to agree that any receiver appointed to take possession or control of the borrowers’ assets or business in order to recover owed money acts as an agent of the borrowers, not of the lenders.
Lenders may also require environmental due diligence on the borrowers’ business and assets.
Civil claims for compensation or other remedies that may be brought under tort include:
Claims may also be brought in contract for breach of environmental obligations (eg, under a lease, supply contracts, or construction contract).
Civil claims for environmental damage can also be recovered under legislation (eg, for the recovery of the cost of clean-up or measures to prevent pollution, per EPMA, EPHA and PPSA).
Apart from claims for monetary compensation, other remedies may include an injunction to stop an ongoing polluting activity or prevent an imminent one.
Damages awarded by a court are intended to be compensatory, and the award of exemplary/punitive damages, which seek to punish for egregious wrongdoing, is the exception, not the rule.
It could be possible, for example, to claim exemplary damages when a company knowingly discharges toxic waste onto a neighbour’s land into a neighbour’s (trespass to land) in anticipation that any compensatory damages would be lower than the cost of proper disposal of the waste.
Representative actions for environmental-related civil claims are theoretically possible but rare in practice and may be used if known claimants share a common interest (eg, multiple known landowners affected by the same pollution source).
The court must be satisfied that the applicant is a proper person to conduct the proceedings and that the persons represented have the same interest as the applicant.
There have not been many civil cases related to environmental liability in Singapore, as environmental governance and regulation are mostly statutory and administrative, and enforced or administered by regulatory bodies.
In Animal Concerns Research & Education Society v Tan Boon Kwee [2011] SGCA 2, the claimant engaged a contractor to construct an animal shelter. The contractor subsequently employed the defendant, a director of the contractor, to supervise the construction. The site was to be constructed by levelling the soil on the site; however, under the defendant’s supervision, soil from another site was brought in instead, resulting in severe soil pollution on the site. The Court of Appeal found the defendant liable in negligence to the claimant for the pollution.
Indemnities and other contractual agreements can be used to privately transfer or apportion liability for environmental damage or breaches of environmental law in Singapore. Such indemnities and agreements are commonly used in share purchase/asset purchase agreements, leases, and joint venture/construction agreements.
Any private agreement to transfer or apportion does not bind a regulator seeking to enforce a statutory obligation against a statutory obligee. Neither does it prevent a third party from seeking to enforce a civil liability against the indemnified party of an indemnity or transferring party in an agreement that transfers or apportions away liability.
There are currently no specific laws governing contaminated land in Singapore. However, NEA has the authority to create regulations aimed at controlling land pollution, subject to the approval of the Minister, in accordance with the EPMA.
Under the EPMA, permission from NEA is required before discharging or allowing the discharge of pollutants into any drain, including watercourses. NEA may also mandate individuals responsible for discharging pollutants into drains or onto land to remove or clean up the pollution.
In emergencies, NEA is allowed to take immediate action to address the issue and prevent injury or danger to public health, as well as to mitigate serious environmental pollution. After addressing the emergency, NEA can, under the EPMA, seek reimbursement from the responsible polluter or landowner for the cost of its measures.
Planning permission under the PA is also required for any building or engineering works on land or a material change of use of the land. Where contaminated land used for polluting activities is proposed to be put to a non-polluting use, such as a commercial or residential development, URA may require the landowner to remediate the land adequately before granting planning permission.
Administratively, under the Code of Practice on Pollution Control (2000 Edition (with amendments in February 2001, June 2002 and February 2004)), a non-statutory guidance published by the Ministry of the Environment (now MSE), when a site that is used for pollutive activities (as specified in the Code) is to be re-developed, re-zoned or re-used for a non-pollutive activity, a study must be conducted on the site to assess the extent of land contamination. If the study reveals that the site is contaminated, it must be cleaned up to standards acceptable for its intended use. A non-exhaustive list of standards and technical guidelines (comprising various Dutch, American, and New Zealand standards and guidelines) is set out in the Code for reference.
Where industrial land is leased from JTC, a statutory agency responsible for developing industrial infrastructure in Singapore, by a tenant for a short term tenancy (three years + three-year option) for pollutive activities (as specified by JTC), or by a lessee for a long term lease of 7 years or more, JTC requires the tenant/lessee to conduct an environmental site assessment at the commencement of the tenancy/lease, and at the time of exit from the site (eg, via termination or any transfer/assignment). Unless the tenancy/lease provides otherwise, the tenant or lessee (as the case may be) must restore the land to its pre-tenancy/lease commencement levels or to the prevailing Dutch Intervention Values (whichever is the less stringent).
See 12.1 Key Laws Governing Contaminated Land.
In Singapore, responsibility for clearing up contaminated land may be placed on the polluter. The polluter’s responsibility may be delegated to another party by contract, but this does not bind NEA or affect NEA’s power to require the polluter to take measures to remove or clean up the contamination.
In an emergency, NEA may proceed with the clean-up and seek reimbursement from the polluter or landowner, per EPMA.
Where the landowner seeks planning permission to carry out building or engineering works or materially change the use of land, and it is determined that the land must be remediated, the landowner may be responsible for cleaning up the land to the satisfaction of URA before planning permission is granted under the PA (see 12.1 Key Laws Governing Contaminated Land).
Where more than one party has contributed to land contamination through discharging or causing or permitting the discharge of pollutants into the ground, NEA may under the EPMA direct any one or more of these parties to remove and clean up the contamination.
Where more than one party has contributed to land contamination, tortious liability for the damage is joint and several amongst the contributors.
In the case of JTC leases, tenants/lessees are required, under the terms of the tenancy/lease, to conduct environmental site assessments before transferring/assigning, or subletting their tenancy or lease. Each of the tenant/lessee, assignee, or sublessee’s contribution to the land contamination is documented and can prima facie be apportioned accordingly (see 12.1 Key Laws Governing Contaminated Land).
The locus standi requirements for bringing proceedings by those affected by contamination against polluters/landowners/occupiers of land depend on the nature of the claim:
Investigations into land contamination cases are likely to be led by NEA under the EPMA, and can be broken down into various stages.
Triggering Event
Investigation
Determination of Responsibility
Regulatory Directions and Enforcement Action
Post-Remediation Monitoring
The key policies and laws directly relating to climate change in Singapore include:
In Singapore’s submitted 2035 nationally determined contribution under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992 (“UNFCCC”), Singapore pledged to reduce GHG emissions to between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2035.
In its updated Long-Term Low-Emissions Strategy submitted under the UNFCCC, Singapore announced its aim to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050.
Asbestos is considered HS, and thus its import, manufacture, and sale must be licensed. The import of asbestos has been banned. Its storage and use are also regulated, as per EPMA.
An employer of or principal giving directions to a person:
must, in accordance with the WSHA, ensure an asbestos survey is conducted to ascertain the presence of asbestos.
Only asbestos-removal contractors approved by MOM can undertake asbestos removal work or repair work. Approved contractors must notify MOM at least seven days before starting any asbestos removal work.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (“PCBs”) are also HS, hence their import, manufacture, sale, and storage must be licensed. PCBs have been banned from import or use. The transportation of PCBs is regulated under the EPMA.
Licensed toxic industrial waste collectors must under the EPHA be engaged to collect waste containing asbestos or PCBs for disposal at the landfill.
Wastes containing asbestos and PCBs are also hazardous wastes, and a permit under the HWA is required for their export from Singapore, import to Singapore, and transit through Singapore.
The key laws and regulatory controls governing waste in Singapore include:
Generally, a producer or consignor of waste typically does not retain criminal liability for waste once a third party, such as a licensed waste collector at a licensed disposal facility, has lawfully disposed of it in accordance with the EPHA.
Where industrial waste has been improperly disposed of at an unauthorised place, the producer or consignor of the waste may be guilty of the following offences:
Even after a third party has properly disposed of toxic industrial waste (“TIW”), the producer of the TIW may also be guilty of an offence of:
The producer or consignor of waste may, in certain circumstances, continue to be liable in contract or tort to a claimant if a third party improperly disposes of the waste in breach of the producer/consignor’s contract with the claimant or in breach of the producer’s/consignor’s duty of care to the claimant.
Notwithstanding the export of hazardous or other waste to a third party outside Singapore and the subsequent disposal of the waste, the exporter may be guilty of an offence of:
If NEA determines that the waste poses a significant risk of injury or damage to human beings or the environment, which requires the waste to be dealt with in a particular way; or Singapore’s international obligations require the waste to be handled in a specific manner, NEA may (under the HWA) order the exporter to deal with the waste in a specified way at the exporter’s expense (including ordering the waste to be imported).
In Singapore, there are no specific requirements for producers to design products that can be easily disassembled and reassembled for end-of-life collection.
Producers of prescribed non-consumer electrical and electronic products are (under the RSA) obligated to take back and properly dispose of these products for recycling once they become waste.
Producers of prescribed consumer electrical and electronic products who exceed the specified sales threshold must participate in a producer responsibility scheme. This scheme requires them to take back, recover, and recycle the e-waste generated from these products, in accordance with the requirements of the RSA.
Additionally, producers of prescribed beverage products are expected from 2026 to be required to join a producer responsibility scheme, which mandates them to take back, recover, and recycle the empty containers of these products, as stipulated by the RSA.
Waste operators (waste collectors, waste disposal facility operators) in Singapore are accorded rights and obligations under the EPHA, including:
Consignor
A consignor of TIW beyond its prescribed threshold for transport must first obtain NEA approval for the proposed consignment.
The consignor of TIW beyond its prescribed threshold must transmit the consignment note to the driver.
The consignor or owner of the consignment of TIW must provide to the carrier transport documents containing a statement regarding the safety requirements and action required to be taken by the carrier, and in the case of transportation of the TIW beyond its prescribed threshold, a copy of the approval by NEA of the consignment (under the EPHA).
Carrier
The carrier of the TIW must give the driver of the vehicle used to transport the waste a copy of the statement regarding the safety requirements and action required to be taken by the carrier in accordance with the EPHA.
Consignee
The consignee of TIW beyond its prescribed threshold must:
Mandatory environmental disclosures in Singapore include:
Energy Efficiency Improvement Plans
The following entities must annually submit to NEA energy use reports and energy efficiency improvement plans:
Energy Use of Buildings
Persons having operational control of business facilities in the following sectors with annual GHG emissions of 2,000 tCO2e or more, must (under the CPA) annually report to NEA their GHG emissions:
Water Usage
Persons supplied water by PUB that use more than 60,000 m3 of water per year (whether or not supplied by PUB) must annually submit to PUB water usage reports and a water efficiency plan in accordance with the PUA.
GHG Emissions
Persons having operational control of business facilities with annual GHG emissions of 2,000 tCO2e or more, must annually report to NEA their GHG emissions (under CPA) if they work in the following sectors:
Waste Generation
Owners, occupiers, or lessees of workplaces served with a notice by NEA (large hotels, shopping malls, factories, warehouses, convention/exhibition centres) must annually submit to NEA information on the amount, type and nature of any waste produced in that workplace and a waste reduction plan.
Plastic Packaging
Producers of packaged products with an annual turnover of at least SGD10 million who, in the course of carrying on a business, supply the products must:
must annually submit to NEA, a report on specified packaging imported or used and a plan to reduce, re-use or recycle packaging in Singapore (whether or not the packaging is imported or used by the producer).
Food Waste Treatment
The building manager of a prescribed building (large shopping malls, hotels, food processing establishments, and catering establishments) must (under the RSA) submit to NEA annually a report on the amount of food waste:
Liability for Non-disclosure or Incomplete Disclosure
It is typically an offence to make a statement in a report or plan knowing it to be false or misleading or to falsify data in such a report or plan.
It is also typically an offence to fail to submit the requisite reports or fail to rectify and re-submit a report considered incomplete or inaccurate as directed by the regulator.
Submitting a false or misleading sustainability report may also give rise to civil liability in contract (misrepresentation) or in tort (misrepresentation) if a statement of fact in the report is materially false or misleading and induces another person to enter into a contract with the statement-maker in reliance on the statement.
Submitting a false or misleading sustainability report can be considered an offence and may result in a civil penalty under the Securities and Futures Act 2001 (SFA). This applies if a statement in the report is materially false or misleading; and if it leads others to subscribe for securities, buy or sell securities, or impacts the market price of securities and if the individual who made the statement did so without caring whether it was true or false, or if they knew the statement was false or misleading.
If a person contemporaneously with such contravention of the SFA by the statement maker, subscribed for, bought, or sold securities, and suffered loss by reason of the contravention, that person may seek compensation from the statement maker.
There is no freedom of information legislation or freedom of environmental information legislation in Singapore for obtaining environmental information from public authorities.
Companies may be required to disclose environmental information related to financial risks in their sustainability reports (see 6.5 ESG Requirements).
The directors of a company may be required to consider disclosing in the company’s annual report, environmental information that affects the ability of the company’s financial statements to give a true and fair view of the financial position of the company (see Companies Act 1967).
Green finance arrangements are voluntary, and some of them have been outlined below.
Green Loans and Green Bonds
These are use-of-proceeds financing instruments and are typically structured to be aligned with the Green Loan Principles of the Loan Market Association (“LMA”), Asia Pacific Loan Market Association (“APLMA”), and the Loan Syndication and Trading Association (“LSTA”); and Green Bond Principles of the International Capital Markets Association (“ICMA”), respectively.
Sustainability-Linked Loans and Bonds
These are financing instruments that involve favourable terms for achieving agreed-upon sustainability performance targets during the tenure of the financing. They are typically aligned with the Sustainability-linked Loan Principles of the LMA, APLMA, and LSTA, as well as the Sustainability-linked Bond Principles of the ICMA, respectively.
Incentives provided by MAS to promote the adoption of green finance are as follows.
Sustainable Bond Grant Scheme
Covers the costs of pre-issuance external reviews or ratings and post-issuance external review or reporting work performed by external reviewers in Singapore for qualifying green, social, sustainability, sustainability-linked, and transition bonds issued and listed in Singapore aligned with any internationally recognised green, social, sustainability-linked principles or standards.
Sustainable Loan Grant Scheme
Defrays the expenses of engaging independent service providers to validate sustainability credentials of qualifying loans by offsetting up to SGD125,000 of expenses incurred for external reviews of eligible green, social, sustainability, sustainability-linked, and transition loans, as well as promoting the adoption of internationally recognised standards and taxonomies.
Taxonomy
The Singapore-Asia Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance (2023 Edition) (“Taxonomy”) was published by the Green Finance Industry Taskforce (replaced with Singapore Sustainable Finance Association), a cross-industry body established by MAS to accelerate Singapore’s development as a leading centre for sustainable finance. It provides guidance on what are considered green, transitional, and ineligible activities.
To be considered green or in transition under the Taxonomy, activities must:
Issuers and borrowers must also perform due diligence to identify, prevent, mitigate, and address the actual and potential adverse impacts related to human rights, workers, the environment, bribery, and consumers. This due diligence should cover their own operations, their supply chain, and other business relationships.
The use of the Taxonomy to guide green finance is currently not mandatory.
Environmental due diligence is typically performed in M&A transactions.
Environmental due diligence that a purchaser of shares/assets may want to conduct includes:
Risk of land contamination based on present and past usage, and if so, legal liability for remediation.
In Singapore, there is no statutory or general duty for a seller to disclose any environmental information to a purchaser.
In the context of a transaction in Singapore, the most common environmental legal issues include:
1 Robinson Road
#18-00 AIA Tower
Singapore
048542
+65 6535 1944
+65 6535 8577
slb@shooklin.com www.shooklin.com