Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG: Right to Legal Representation for Litigants in Person

In Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG, the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Justice Kan Ting Chiu, addressed the issue of whether a litigant in person could have a practicing lawyer present arguments on their behalf as a friend, outside the scope of a 'McKenzie friend'. The court ruled that Mr. Goh, the lawyer in question, could not present arguments for the plaintiff, Wee Soon Kim Anthony, as his friend, as it exceeded the permissible role of a McKenzie friend.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Mr. Goh cannot present arguments for the plaintiff as his friend.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court considered whether a litigant in person could have a lawyer present arguments on their behalf as a 'friend,' outside the scope of a McKenzie friend.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
UBS AGDefendant, RespondentCorporationJudgment for DefendantWon
Wee Soon Kim AnthonyPlaintiff, AppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Mohan Singh of Independent Practitioner
Anthony Wee Soon Kim of Independent Practitioner

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kan Ting ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Davinder Singh SCDrew & Napier LLC
Hri KumarDrew & Napier LLC
Gary LowDrew & Napier LLC
Mohan SinghIndependent Practitioner
Goh Aik LengGoh Aik Leng & Partners
Anthony Wee Soon KimIndependent Practitioner

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff was medically unfit to attend a hearing.
  2. A practicing lawyer, Mr. Goh, appeared with instructions to argue for the plaintiff as a friend, not as counsel.
  3. The plaintiff had previously been represented by a law corporation, but was acting in person at the time of the hearing.
  4. Mr. Goh described himself as solicitor on record to file documents and accept service.
  5. The court ruled that Mr. Goh could not present arguments for the plaintiff as his friend.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG, Suit 834/2001, [2002] SGHC 213

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Hearing began
Hearing concluded
Plaintiff filed notice acting in person
Goh Aik Leng & Partners filed notice to act for plaintiff
Hearing for application by defendant to withdraw interrogatories
Action came on for continued hearing
Application adjourned for further hearing
Scheduled end of continued hearing
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Right to Legal Representation
    • Outcome: The court ruled that a litigant in person cannot have a lawyer present arguments on their behalf as a friend, exceeding the scope of a McKenzie friend.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Scope of McKenzie friend assistance
      • Right of litigant in person to have a friend present arguments
    • Related Cases:
      • [1970] 3 All ER 1034
      • [1991] 2 QB 260
      • [1999] 1 WLR 1807

8. Remedies Sought

  1. No remedies sought

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
R v Leicester City Justices Ex parte BarrowCourt of AppealYes[1991] 2 QB 260EnglandCited to define the limitations of a McKenzie friend and that a friend cannot claim the right himself.
McKenzie v McKenzieCourt of AppealYes[1970] 3 All ER 1034EnglandCited as the origin of the term 'McKenzie friend' and its role in assisting litigants in person.
Collier v HicksN/AYes(1831) 2 B & Ad 663N/ACited for the principle that a friend may attend, take notes, make suggestions, and give advice, but cannot demand to take part in the proceedings as an advocate.
R v Bow County Court Ex parte PellingCourt of AppealYes[1999] 1 WLR 1807EnglandCited to clarify the role and limitations of a McKenzie friend, emphasizing that the right belongs to the litigant, not the friend.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • McKenzie friend
  • Litigant in person
  • Right of audience
  • Legal representation

15.2 Keywords

  • McKenzie friend
  • litigant in person
  • legal representation
  • right of audience

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
McKenzie Friend80
Civil Practice70
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility50
Evidence Law30

16. Subjects

  • Civil Procedure
  • Legal Representation