Cheong Choon Bin v PP: Employer's Duty to Verify Immigration Status of Foreign Employees

Cheong Choon Bin appealed his conviction under s 57(1)(e) of the Immigration Act for employing immigration offenders. The High Court, presided over by Yong Pung How CJ, dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was indeed the employer of the illegal workers and had failed to exercise due diligence in checking their immigration status. The court emphasized that the duty to verify the immigration status of foreign workers is non-delegable.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Cheong Choon Bin was convicted of employing immigration offenders. The High Court upheld the conviction, emphasizing the non-delegable duty to verify employees' immigration status.

1.7 Decision Date

3 September 2001

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Conviction upheld	Won	Toh Yung Cheong of Deputy Public Prosecutor
Cheong Choon Bin	Appellant	Individual	Appeal dismissed	Lost	Allan Tan Chwee Wan of Sim Mong Teck & Partners

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Yong Pung How	Chief Justice	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Toh Yung Cheong	Deputy Public Prosecutor
Allan Tan Chwee Wan	Sim Mong Teck & Partners

4. Facts

The appellant's company, C & B, held a contract for cleaning and gardening at Good Luck Garden.
Police raided Good Luck Garden and arrested three Sri Lankan nationals wearing C & B uniforms.
The Sri Lankan nationals were subsequently convicted of entering Singapore unlawfully.
The prosecution alleged the appellant employed the Sri Lankan witnesses under the contract with Good Luck Garden.
Witnesses testified that the Sri Lankan workers were seen working at Good Luck Garden in C & B uniforms.
The appellant claimed he was unaware of the exact identities of the foreign workers.
The district judge found the appellant lacked credibility and preferred the prosecution's evidence.

5. Formal Citations

Cheong Choon Bin v Public Prosecutor, MA 76/2001, [2001] SGHC 255

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2000-02-15	Police officers conducted a raid on Good Luck Garden Condominium
1999-05-01	Contract between C & B and estate managers of Good Luck Garden began
2000-04-30	Contract between C & B and estate managers of Good Luck Garden ended
2001-09-04	Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

Employment of Illegal Immigrants
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant was the employer of the illegal immigrants and had failed to exercise due diligence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Employer's duty of due diligence
  - Non-delegable responsibility
Definition of 'Employ'
- Outcome: The court determined that the appellant fell within the statutory definition of 'employ' under the Immigration Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Engaging services with or without remuneration
  - Substance over form
Findings of Fact by Trial Judge
- Outcome: The court upheld the trial judge's findings of fact, finding no reason to overturn the assessment of witness credibility.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Credibility of witnesses
  - Weight of evidence

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against conviction
Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

Violation of Section 57(1)(e) of the Immigration Act (Cap 133, 1997 Ed)

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals
Immigration Offences

11. Industries

Cleaning Services
Gardening Services

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Tamilkodi s/o Pompayan v PP	High Court	Yes	[1999] 1 SLR 702	Singapore	Cited to establish that the manner of remuneration and degree of control are significant considerations in determining the existence of an employment relationship.
Lim Ah Poh v PP	Unknown	Yes	[1992] 1 SLR 713	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact made by a trial court unless they are clearly against the weight of the evidence.
Browne v Dunn	Unknown	Yes	[1893] 6 R 67	Unknown	Cited regarding the principle that allegations not put to a witness on the stand should not be given much weight.
Gay Yun Lin v PP	Unknown	Yes	[1999] 1 SLR 547	Singapore	Cited to support the definition of 'employ' as engaging or using the service of any person in the running of a business.
Lee Boon Leong Joseph v PP	Unknown	Yes	[1997] 1 SLR 445	Singapore	Cited to support the principle that the substance of the employer-employee relationship is more important than its form.
PP v Koo Pui Fong	Unknown	Yes	[1996] 2 SLR 266	Singapore	Cited to support the principle that wilful blindness is evidence from which guilty knowledge can be inferred.
Ramli bin Daud v PP	Unknown	Yes	[1996] 3 SLR 225	Singapore	Cited to support the principle that the employer must personally examine a worker's identification papers to exercise due diligence.
Mohamed Lukman bin Amoo v PP	Unknown	Yes	[1999] 4 SLR 292	Singapore	Cited to support the interpretation of the 1998 amendments to the Immigration Act regarding the steps to be taken by a person charged under s 57(1)(e).

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Immigration Act (Cap 133, 1997 Ed) s 57(1)(e)	Singapore
Immigration Act (Cap 133, 1997 Ed) s 2	Singapore
Immigration Act (Cap 133, 1997 Ed) ss 57(9) & 57(10)	Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) s 18	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Immigration Act
Employ
Due diligence
Illegal worker
Non-delegable responsibility
Wilful blindness

15.2 Keywords

Immigration offenders
Employer's duty
Due diligence
Illegal workers
Singapore
Immigration Act

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Immigration Offences	90
Criminal Law	50
Criminal Procedure	30
Asset Recovery	10

16. Subjects

Immigration
Employment
Criminal Law
Appeals