Law Society v Tan Buck Chye: Show Cause for Improperly Procuring Conveyancing Work
The Law Society of Singapore applied to the High Court for Tan Buck Chye Dave to show cause as to why he should not be dealt with under the Legal Profession Act for grossly improper conduct. Tan Buck Chye Dave, an advocate and solicitor, attempted to procure conveyancing work by offering monetary rewards to individuals referring such work to him. The High Court, comprising Chan Sek Keong CJ, Lai Siu Chiu J, and Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, granted the application and ordered Tan Buck Chye Dave to be suspended from practice for six months.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application granted; respondent suspended from practice for six months.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Law Society sought to suspend Tan Buck Chye for attempting to procure conveyancing work by offering monetary rewards. The court suspended him for six months.
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 | |
| Tan Buck Chye Dave | Respondent | Individual | Suspended from practice for six months | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Sek Keong | Chief Justice | No |
| Lai Siu Chiu | Judge | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Respondent attempted to procure HDB conveyancing matters by promising monetary rewards.
- Respondent offered Chia Heng Huat $200 for each HDB conveyancing matter referred.
- Respondent offered Chia Heng Huat's real estate agents $200 or 50% of excess legal costs over $2,000.
- Respondent offered Mohamed Husain $200 for each HDB conveyancing matter referred.
- Respondent admitted to the facts as set out in the Law Society's statement.
- Respondent did not consummate any transactions with the agents.
- Respondent's partners advised him not to proceed with the transactions.
5. Formal Citations
- Law Society of Singapore v Tan Buck Chye Dave, OS 1352/2006, SUM 3933/2006, [2006] SGHC 216
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Respondent called to the Bar | |
| Respondent attempted to procure employment via Chia Heng Huat | |
| Respondent met with Chia Heng Huat at MOS Burger | |
| Respondent met with Mohamed Husain at MOS Burger | |
| Goldeneye Investigations & Security Services Pte Ltd referred information to the Law Society | |
| Disciplinary Committee appointed | |
| Respondent admitted to the Law Society’s case | |
| Pre-trial conference held | |
| Hearing before the Disciplinary Committee | |
| Decision date |
7. Legal Issues
- Grossly Improper Conduct
- Outcome: The court found the respondent guilty of grossly improper conduct.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Attempting to procure employment
- Offering monetary reward for referrals
8. Remedies Sought
- Suspension from practice
- Order to show cause
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Legal Profession Act
10. Practice Areas
- Disciplinary Proceedings
11. Industries
- Legal
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra Samuel | Singapore High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 696 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court must protect the public and register its disapproval of the solicitor's conduct. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ong Ying Ping | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR 583 | Singapore | Cited for the inherent public interest in the administration of justice. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ahmad Khalis bin Abdul Ghani | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the legal profession exists to serve the ends of justice and fairness. |
| Bolton v Law Society | English Court | Yes | [1994] 1 WLR 512 | England | Cited for the principle that any solicitor who is shown to have discharged his professional duties with anything less than complete integrity must expect severe sanctions. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Lau See-Jin Jeffrey | Singapore High Court | No | [1999] 2 SLR 215 | Singapore | Cited as a comparison case regarding professional misconduct and the appropriate sanction. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Lee Cheong Hoh | Singapore High Court | No | [2001] 2 SLR 80 | Singapore | Cited as a comparison case regarding professional misconduct and the appropriate sanction. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Vardan Vasantha Lakshmi | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2006] SGHC 185 | Singapore | Cited for principles regarding integrity and trustworthiness of solicitors. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Conveyancing
- Monetary reward
- Referral
- Grossly improper conduct
- Legal Profession Act
- Show cause
- Suspension
- Disciplinary Committee
15.2 Keywords
- Law Society
- Tan Buck Chye Dave
- Legal Profession Act
- Conveyancing
- Show cause
- Suspension
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act | 90 |
| Conveyance | 70 |
| Professional conduct | 50 |
| Assessment of Legal Costs | 30 |
| Contract Law | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Professional Responsibility