Littlemore Stuart QC v Chee Soon Juan: Ad Hoc Admission & Disparagement of Singapore Judiciary

Mr. Stuart Littlemore QC applied for ad hoc admission to the High Court of Singapore to represent Dr. Chee Soon Juan in defamation suits. The Attorney General and the Law Society of Singapore opposed the application, citing Mr. Littlemore's previous disparaging remarks about the Singapore judiciary. Justice Lai Kew Chai dismissed the application, finding Mr. Littlemore unfit for admission due to his contemptuous and disrespectful conduct.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Application for ad hoc admission by Stuart Littlemore QC to represent Dr Chee Soon Juan was dismissed due to Littlemore's disparaging remarks about the Singapore judiciary.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Attorney-GeneralRespondentGovernment AgencyApplication DismissedWon
Jeffrey Chan of Attorney-General
Law Society of SingaporeRespondentStatutory BoardApplication DismissedWon
Chee Soon JuanOtherIndividual
Lee Kuan YewOtherIndividual
Goh Chok TongOtherIndividual
Stuart Littlemore QCApplicantIndividualApplication DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Kew ChaiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Jeffrey ChanAttorney-General
Yang Lih ShyngKhattar Wong & Partners
Siraj OmarDrew & Napier LLC
Davinder SinghDrew & Napier LLC
Hri KumarDrew & Napier LLC

4. Facts

  1. Mr. Littlemore applied for ad hoc admission to represent Dr. Chee in defamation suits.
  2. Mr. Littlemore had previously criticized the Singapore judiciary, calling it 'compliant' and 'in the pocket of the government'.
  3. The Attorney General and the Law Society of Singapore opposed the application based on Mr. Littlemore's disparaging remarks.
  4. Mr. Littlemore's remarks were made in an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corp and in an article published in the Sydney Morning Herald.
  5. Dr. Chee argued that Mr. Littlemore's views should not impact his ability to represent him.
  6. The plaintiffs in the defamation suits did not object to Dr. Chee being represented by a Queen's Counsel but left the suitability of Mr. Littlemore to the court.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Littlemore Stuart QC, OM 600002/2002, [2002] SGHC 16

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Mr. Littlemore became a Queen's Counsel.
Mr. Littlemore was in Singapore as an observer for the International Commission of Jurists.
The International Commission of Jurists released a report by Mr. Littlemore.
Mr. Littlemore was interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corp.
Mr. Littlemore's article was published in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Originating motion filed by Mr. Stuart Littlemore QC.
Motion heard by the High Court.
Application dismissed.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Ad Hoc Admission
    • Outcome: The court dismissed the application for ad hoc admission.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [1998] 1 SLR 440
  2. Suitability for Admission
    • Outcome: The court found the applicant unsuitable for admission due to his prior disparaging remarks about the Singapore judiciary.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Ad Hoc Admission to the Singapore Bar

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Ad Hoc Admission
  • Defamation Litigation

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Re Caplan Jonathan Michael QC (No 2)High CourtYes[1998] 1 SLR 440SingaporeCited for setting out the requirements of Section 21 of the Legal Profession Act for ad hoc admission of Queen's Counsel.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Ed) s 21Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Ad Hoc Admission
  • Queen's Counsel
  • Disparagement of Judiciary
  • Rule of Law
  • Independence of Judiciary
  • Defamation Suits

15.2 Keywords

  • Ad Hoc Admission
  • Queen's Counsel
  • Singapore Judiciary
  • Defamation
  • Legal Profession Act

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Ad Hoc Admission95
Legal Profession Act90
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility80
Civil Practice30
Asset Recovery10

16. Subjects

  • Legal Ethics
  • Judicial Independence
  • Defamation