Gan Hock Keong Winston v PP: Abetting Illegal Employment of Foreign Worker
In Gan Hock Keong Winston v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by Gan Hock Keong Winston against his conviction for abetting Tan Hui Huang in illegally employing a foreign worker, Yap Chai Teck, in violation of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act. The High Court, presided over by Chief Justice Yong Pung How, dismissed the appeal, finding no basis to fault the District Judge's reasoning and upholding the conviction and sentence. The court found that Gan Hock Keong Winston had arranged for Yap Chai Teck to work at Tan Hui Huang's stall, despite Yap Chai Teck not having a valid work permit.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Gan Hock Keong Winston appeals conviction for abetting the illegal employment of a foreign worker. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Judgment Upheld | Won | Ivan Chua Boon Chwee of Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Gan Hock Keong Winston | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ivan Chua Boon Chwee | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Nai Thiam Siew Patrick | Abraham Low LLC |
4. Facts
- The appellant was the owner of Jie Sheng Food Court.
- Yap Chai Teck was working for the appellant as a coffee shop assistant with a work permit to work at Jie Sheng.
- Yap Chai Teck was found working at the chicken rice stall without a valid work permit.
- The appellant, Tan, and Yap gave conflicting accounts of the events in court.
- The appellant had two prior convictions under the Employment of Foreign Workers Act.
5. Formal Citations
- Gan Hock Keong Winston v Public Prosecutor, MA 115/2002, [2002] SGHC 221
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant convicted of two offences under section 5(1) of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act. | |
| Yap Chai Teck started working for the appellant as a coffee shop assistant. | |
| Yap Chai Teck started working at the Hainanese Boneless Chicken Rice Stall. | |
| Yap Chai Teck was found working at the Hainanese Boneless Chicken Rice Stall by MOM officers. | |
| Tan Hui Huang made a statement to MOM. | |
| The appellant made a statement to MOM. | |
| Tan pleaded guilty to employing Yap without a valid work permit. | |
| Appellant was convicted. | |
| High Court dismissed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Abetment of Offence
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction, finding that the appellant had abetted the illegal employment.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Intentional aiding
- Arranging for illegal employment
- Interference with Trial Judge's Findings of Fact
- Outcome: The court found no basis to fault the trial judge's reasoning and upheld the findings of fact.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Findings plainly wrong
- Findings against the weight of evidence
- Admissibility of Previous Inconsistent Statements
- Outcome: The court found that the trial judge acted in accordance with the principles outlined in s 147(6) of the Evidence Act in substituting the previous inconsistent statements as substantive evidence.
- Category: Evidence
- Sub-Issues:
- Impeachment of witness credibility
- Substitution of oral testimony
- Manifest Excessiveness of Sentence
- Outcome: The court did not find the sentence to be manifestly excessive.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Error of fact or principle
- Discretion of trial judge
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Abetment of employing a foreigner without a valid work permit
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Sentencing
- Documentary Evidence
- Witness Testimony
11. Industries
- Food and Beverage
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teo Kian Leong v PP | High Court | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR 147 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or clearly against the weight of the evidence. |
| 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 unless they are plainly wrong or clearly against the weight of the evidence. |
| Jimina Jacee d/o CD Athananasius v PP | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR 205 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or clearly against the weight of the evidence. |
| Ramis a/l Muniandy v PP | Unknown | Yes | [2001] 3 SLR 534 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or clearly against the weight of the evidence. |
| Kwan Peng Hong v PP | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 4 SLR 96 | Singapore | Cited for the requirement that grounds of judgment should set out reasoning with great comprehensiveness and clarity. |
| Chai Chien Wei Kelvin v PP | Unknown | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 25 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing when a previous inconsistent statement may be substituted as substantive evidence. |
| Choy Tuck Sum v PP | Unknown | No | [2000] 4 SLR 665 | Singapore | Cited by the appellant to argue that his sentence was manifestly excessive, but the court distinguished it. |
| PP v Md Noor bin Abdul Majeed | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR 17 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not generally interfere with the sentence passed below unless there was some error of fact or principle, or the sentence was manifestly excessive or inadequate. |
| Lai Oei Mui Jenny v PP | Unknown | Yes | [1993] 3 SLR 305 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that while the lack of financial gain is a legitimate mitigating factor, it carries very little weight in court. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Employment of Foreign Workers Act, Chapter 91A | Singapore |
| section 5(1) of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, Chapter 91A | Singapore |
| section 23(1) of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, Chapter 91A | Singapore |
| section 5(6) of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, Chapter 91A | Singapore |
| section 5(6)(b)(i) of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, Chapter 91A | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97) | Singapore |
| s 147 Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Ed) | Singapore |
| s 157 Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Abetment
- Employment of Foreign Workers Act
- Work permit
- Previous inconsistent statements
- Impeachment of witness
- Manifestly excessive sentence
15.2 Keywords
- Abetment
- Illegal employment
- Foreign worker
- Singapore
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Employment Law
- Evidence