Law Society of Singapore v Ong Lilian: Show Cause Action for Theft Conviction
The Law Society of Singapore applied to the High Court for an order requiring Lilian Ong, an advocate and solicitor, to show cause following her conviction for theft in a dwelling. The High Court, comprising Chao Hick Tin JA, Lai Siu Chiu J, and Tan Lee Meng J, found that the conviction implied a defect of character rendering her unfit for the profession. The court ordered Ong Lilian to be struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors and to pay the costs of the Law Society.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Respondent ordered to be struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Law Society sought to show cause against Ong Lilian, an advocate and solicitor, following her conviction for theft. The court ordered her to be struck off the roll.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore | Applicant | Statutory Board | Application Granted | Won | |
| Ong Lilian | Respondent | Individual | Struck off the roll | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Lai Siu Chiu | Judge | No |
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Aziz Tayabali | Aziz Tayabali and Associates |
4. Facts
- The respondent, an advocate and solicitor, was convicted of theft in a dwelling.
- The respondent was observed placing items into her handbag at a department store.
- The total value of the stolen items was $179.80.
- The respondent claimed she inadvertently walked out of the store while on the phone.
- The respondent's defense of memory loss due to depression was rejected by the district judge.
- The respondent was sentenced to four weeks’ imprisonment after an appeal by the Public Prosecutor.
5. Formal Citations
- Law Society of Singapore v Ong Lilian, OS 244/2005, [2005] SGHC 187
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Respondent admitted as an advocate and solicitor. | |
| Respondent observed behaving suspiciously at Tangs department store. | |
| District judge convicted the respondent on the charge of theft. | |
| Respondent sentenced to two weeks’ imprisonment. | |
| Sentence enhanced to four weeks by the High Court. | |
| Order of court obtained requiring the respondent to show cause. | |
| Judgment delivered ordering the respondent to be struck off the roll. |
7. Legal Issues
- Professional Misconduct
- Outcome: The court found that the respondent's conviction for theft implied a defect of character making her unfit for the legal profession.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Defect of character
- Dishonesty
8. Remedies Sought
- Order to show cause why the respondent should not be disciplined
- Striking off the roll
9. Cause of Actions
- Show Cause Action
10. Practice Areas
- Disciplinary Proceedings
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Tham Yu Xian Rick | High Court | Yes | [1999] 4 SLR 168 | Singapore | Cited regarding the finality and conclusiveness of a conviction in show cause proceedings. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Amdad Hussein Lawrence | High Court | Yes | [2000] 4 SLR 88 | Singapore | Cited as a case with similar facts where a solicitor was struck off the roll for theft. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Wee Wei Fen | High Court | Yes | [2000] 1 SLR 234 | Singapore | Cited regarding the irrelevance of whether the offence was committed in the solicitor's capacity as a solicitor. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra Samuel | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 696 | Singapore | Cited regarding the objects of disciplinary powers under s 83 of the LPA and the importance of honesty and integrity in the legal profession. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Lau See-Jin Jeffrey | High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR 215 | Singapore | Cited regarding the objects of disciplinary powers under s 83 of the LPA. |
| Bolton v Law Society | England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) | Yes | [1994] 1 WLR 512 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the approach to be taken in cases of proven dishonesty. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) s 98 | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) s 83(1) | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) s 83(2)(a) | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) s 94A | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) s 380 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Theft in dwelling
- Professional misconduct
- Show cause
- Defect of character
- Dishonesty
- Unfit for profession
15.2 Keywords
- Law Society
- Ong Lilian
- Theft
- Professional Misconduct
- Singapore
- Advocate and Solicitor
- Struck off roll
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act | 95 |
| Disciplinary Proceedings | 90 |
| Professional conduct | 90 |
| Theft | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Criminal Law
- Professional Responsibility