SingTel v IDA: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel in Restitution Claim for Mistake of Law

In Re Sher Jules QC, the High Court of Singapore considered an application for ad hoc admission of Mr. Jules Sher QC to represent Singapore Telecommunications Limited (SingTel) in a suit brought by the Info-communications Development Authority (IDA) claiming $388 million in restitution. The claim arose from an alleged mistake of law in a compensation payment made by IDA's predecessor, TAS. The Law Society of Singapore opposed the application. Lai Kew Chai J allowed the application, finding that the case involved sufficiently complex issues of law and fact and that the circumstances warranted the admission of a Queen's Counsel.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court allowed the ad hoc admission of a Queen's Counsel to represent SingTel in a restitution claim by IDA, concerning a $388 million payment.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Attorney-GeneralOtherGovernment AgencyNeutralNeutral
Hema Subramanian of State Counsel
Law Society of SingaporeOtherStatutory BoardLostLost
SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITEDDefendantCorporationNeutralNeutral
Jules SherApplicantIndividualApplication AllowedWon
Info-communications Development AuthorityPlaintiffStatutory BoardNeutralNeutral

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Kew ChaiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Hema SubramanianState Counsel
Laurence GohLaurence Goh Eng Yau & Co
Prakash PillaiAllen & Gledhill
K ShanmugamAllen & Gledhill
Cavinder BullDrew & Napier

4. Facts

  1. Mr. Jules Sher QC sought ad hoc admission to appear for SingTel in a suit claiming $388 million.
  2. The claim was based on an alleged mistake of law in a compensation payment made by TAS to SingTel.
  3. TAS paid SingTel $1.5 billion as compensation for modification of its telecommunications license.
  4. IDA, as successor to TAS, claimed that $388 million of the compensation was mistakenly paid due to a tax provision.
  5. SingTel refused to repay the amount, leading to the lawsuit.
  6. The Law Society of Singapore opposed the ad hoc admission.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Re Sher Jules QC, OM 600039/2001, [2002] SGHC 140

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Mr Sher obtained the degree of Bachelor of Commerce followed by an LL.B at the University of Witwaterstrand, Johannesburg
Mr Sher took the post-graduate Bachelor of Civil Law at Oxford University, New College
Mr Sher was called to the Bar of England and Wales
Mr Sher was appointed one of Her Majesty’s Counsel
Mr Sher was appointed a Recorder
Mr Sher was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge in the Chancery Division
TAS granted SingTel a licence to provide telecommunication services
SingTel’s licence was amended to provide that TAS would have the right to licence additional operators
TAS gave notice of its intention to modify a condition of SingTel’s licence
TAS paid the compensation sum of $1.5 billion to SingTel
The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore informed IDA and SingTel that no tax would be payable on the compensation amount received by SingTel
IDA requested SingTel to repay the amount allegedly overpaid by TAS of $388 million
IDA commenced the suit
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel
    • Outcome: The court allowed the ad hoc admission of the Queen's Counsel.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Difficulty and complexity of the case
      • Special qualification or experience of the applicant
      • Suitability for admission
  2. Restitution for Mistake of Law
    • Outcome: The court did not rule on the merits of the restitution claim, as the issue was before it in the underlying suit.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Operative mistake of law
      • Defences to restitutionary claim

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Repayment of Monetary Sum

9. Cause of Actions

  • Restitution
  • Unjust Enrichment

10. Practice Areas

  • Ad Hoc Admission
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Telecommunications

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Re Caplan Jonathan Michael QC (No 2)Singapore High CourtYes[1998] 1 SLR 440SingaporeCited for the three-stage test for ad hoc admission of Queen's Counsel.
Re Flint Charles John Raffles QCSingapore High CourtYes[2001] 2 SLR 276SingaporeCited to illustrate a case where ad hoc admission was denied to allow local counsel to take up the challenge.
Re Howe Russell Thomas QCSingapore High CourtYes[2001] 3 SLR 575SingaporeCited to endorse the nurturing of the local Bar.
William Sindall plc v Cambridgeshire County CouncilCourt of AppealYes[1994] 1 WLR 1016England and WalesCited as a case involving mistake in the realm of contract and of relevance at the trial of the suit.
South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council v Svenska International plcUnknownYes[1995] 1 All ER 545England and WalesCited as a case involving the law of contract and restitution and the defence of change of position, and which would also be relevant to the issues in the suit.
Management Corporation Strata Title No 473 v De Beers Jewellery Pte LtdHigh CourtYes[2001] 4 SLR 90SingaporeCited by the Law Society of Singapore to argue that unjust enrichment under a payment made under a mistake of law was reversible.
Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City CouncilHouse of LordsYes[1998] 4 All ER 513England and WalesCited as a case that the judge had personally followed with great interest over the last decade generally and particularly since the decision handed down by the House of Lords.
Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City CouncilHouse of LordsYes[1999] 2 AC 349England and WalesCited as a case that the judge had personally followed with great interest over the last decade generally and particularly since the decision handed down by the House of Lords.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161)Singapore
Info-Communications Development Authority of Singapore Act (Cap 137A)Singapore
Telecommunications Authority of Singapore Act (Cap 323)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Ad hoc admission
  • Queen's Counsel
  • Restitution
  • Mistake of law
  • Compensation
  • Telecommunications license
  • Statutory obligation
  • Full and final settlement
  • Change of position

15.2 Keywords

  • Ad hoc admission
  • Queen's Counsel
  • Restitution
  • Mistake of law
  • SingTel
  • IDA

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Legal Profession Act90
Ad Hoc Admission85
Restitution80
Unjust Enrichment75
Administrative Law50
Contract Law40
Misrepresentation30
Fiduciary Duties20

16. Subjects

  • Legal Profession
  • Restitution
  • Contract Law