Lau Khee Leong v PP: Abetting False Statements in Employment Pass Applications

Lau Khee Leong, a licensed employment agent, was convicted in the District Court on four charges of abetting the making of false statements in employment pass applications submitted to the Ministry of Manpower. The High Court, with Yong Pung How CJ presiding on 13 August 2004, dismissed Lau Khee Leong's appeal against both conviction and sentence, finding that the district judge did not err in finding that Lau Khee Leong had the requisite mens rea to abet the principal offence of making a false statement.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 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

Lau Khee Leong, an employment agent, was convicted of abetting false statements in employment pass applications. The High Court dismissed his appeal against conviction and sentence.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyJudgment upheldWon
Low Cheong Yeow of Deputy Public Prosecutor
Lau Khee LeongAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Lau Khee Leong of Independent Practitioner

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Yong Pung HowChief JusticeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Low Cheong YeowDeputy Public Prosecutor
Lau Khee LeongIndependent Practitioner

4. Facts

  1. Appellant was a licensed employment agent and sole proprietor of Heavenly Employment Agency.
  2. Appellant helped complete and submit employment pass applications for four PRC nationals.
  3. Applications stated that the workers would be employed by Aquatic World Building Contractors or Eng Thye Shing Construction.
  4. Workers were not actually employed by those companies but were freelancing.
  5. Appellant knew the workers were not working for the sponsoring companies.
  6. Appellant collected application fees from the workers.
  7. Appellant reimbursed the workers for the premature termination of their employment passes.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Lau Khee Leong v Public Prosecutor, MA 145/2003, [2004] SGHC 175
  2. Lau Khee Leong v Public Prosecutor, , [2004] SGDC 98

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Appellant helped to complete and submit Form 8 EP Applications for foreign workers.
Employment Pass Department received Form 8 application for Xue Liang Song.
Employment Pass Department received Form 8 application for Fang Qing Rong.
Employment pass was issued to Fang Qing Rong.
Employment Pass was issued to Xue Liang Song.
High Court dismissed the appeal against conviction and sentence.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Abetting the making of false statements
    • Outcome: The court found that the appellant had the requisite mens rea to abet the principal offence of making a false statement.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Intent to aid in obtaining employment documents
      • Knowledge of false statements in applications
  2. Findings of fact by trial judge
    • Outcome: The court held that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or reached against the weight of the evidence.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Approach of appellate court
      • Credibility of witnesses
    • Related Cases:
      • [1992] 1 SLR 713
      • [2002] 3 SLR 469
      • [2003] 2 SLR 225
      • [2004] 3 SLR 34
      • [1998] 3 SLR 656
  3. Sentencing
    • Outcome: The court held that the sentence imposed was neither wrong in law nor manifestly excessive.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Whether sentence wrong in law
      • Whether sentence manifestly excessive
    • Related Cases:
      • [1986] SLR 126
      • [2002] 1 SLR 301

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Appeal against conviction
  2. Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

  • Abetment of making false statements

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Appeals
  • Immigration Offences

11. Industries

  • Employment Agencies
  • Construction

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lim Ah Poh v PPHigh CourtYes[1992] 1 SLR 713SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or reached against the weight of the evidence.
Heng Aik Peng v PPHigh CourtYes[2002] 3 SLR 469SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or reached against the weight of the evidence.
Mahdi bin Ibrahim Bamadhaj v PPHigh CourtYes[2003] 2 SLR 225SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or reached against the weight of the evidence.
Dong Guitian v PPHigh CourtYes[2004] 3 SLR 34SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not overturn a trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are plainly wrong or reached against the weight of the evidence.
Yap Giau Beng Terence v PPHigh CourtYes[1998] 3 SLR 656SingaporeCited for the principle that where findings of fact depend on the credibility and veracity of witnesses, an appellate court should be all the more reluctant to disturb a trial judge’s findings.
Rajendran s/o Kurusamy v PPHigh CourtNo[1998] 3 SLR 225SingaporeCited regarding the weight a district judge should attach to conditioned statements admitted as evidence under s 371 of the CPC.
PP v Liew Kim ChooHigh CourtNo[1997] 3 SLR 699SingaporeCited regarding the use of a statement of facts of a witness who has pleaded guilty in earlier proceedings.
Tan Koon Swan v PPHigh CourtYes[1986] SLR 126SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court unless it is satisfied that the sentence is manifestly excessive or wrong in law.
Abu Syeed Chowdhury v PPHigh CourtYes[2002] 1 SLR 301SingaporeCited for the sentencing norm and principles that where a false representation is made under s 57(1) of the Act, a custodial sentence is the applicable norm.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Immigration Act (Cap 133)Singapore
Section 57(1)(k) of the Immigration Act (Cap 133, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 57(1)(iv) of the Immigration Act (Cap 133)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224)Singapore
Section 109 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Section 371 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Employment pass
  • False statement
  • Abetment
  • Foreign worker
  • Employment agent
  • Mens rea
  • Conditioned statement
  • Sponsoring company

15.2 Keywords

  • Employment pass
  • False statement
  • Abetment
  • Immigration Act
  • Penal Code
  • Foreign worker
  • Employment agent

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Immigration80
Employment Law75
Criminal Law70
Employment Agency Law65
Criminal Procedure60
Sentencing60
Statutory Interpretation40
Contract Law30
Legal Profession Act20

16. Subjects

  • Immigration
  • Criminal Law
  • Employment Law