Anthony Wee v Law Society: Application of Legal Profession Act on Solicitor Misconduct Allegations
In 2006, Anthony Wee Soon Kim applied to the High Court of Singapore under s 96 of the Legal Profession Act against The Law Society of Singapore, challenging the Law Society's dismissal of his complaints against advocate and solicitor Andre Arul. Wee alleged that Arul had breached r 56 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules and committed perjury. Judith Prakash J dismissed the application, affirming the Law Society Council's determination and finding no evidence to support Wee's claims of misconduct.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Order affirming the determination of the Council in relation to both complaints.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Anthony Wee's application against the Law Society was dismissed, affirming the Council's decision regarding complaints against a solicitor for alleged misconduct.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Law Society of Singapore | Respondent | Statutory Board | Determination of Council Affirmed | Won | |
| Anthony Wee Soon Kim | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Abraham Vergis | Drew & Napier |
| Daniel Chia | Drew & Napier |
| Jimmy Yim | Drew & Napier |
4. Facts
- Mr. Wee made complaints to the Law Society against two advocates and solicitors.
- The Law Society constituted an inquiry committee to inquire into the complaints.
- The IC issued its report and recommended that all four complaints against AA be dismissed.
- The Council of the Law Society accepted and adopted the IC's findings and recommendations.
- Mr. Wee filed an application seeking a declaration that the Council's decision was wrong in law and in fact.
- Mr. Wee alleged AA breached r 56 of the Rules by misleading Lai Kew Chai J.
- Mr. Wee alleged AA committed perjury by drafting an allegedly false affidavit.
5. Formal Citations
- Anthony Wee Soon Kim v The Law Society of Singapore, OS 192/2006, [2006] SGHC 219
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Complaints made to the Law Society against two advocates and solicitors | |
| Complaints made to the Law Society against two advocates and solicitors | |
| LCP affirmed an allegedly false affidavit | |
| Inquiry committee issued its report | |
| Council of the Law Society deliberated on the report | |
| Mr. Wee filed the present application | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Rule 56 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules
- Outcome: The court found that AA did not deceive or attempt to deceive Lai J and the IC was justified in dismissing the complaint under r 56.
- Category: Substantive
- Perjury
- Outcome: The court agreed that there was no evidence that AA knew or ought to have known that LCP was telling a lie when he said he was the sole proprietor of the firm and found this complaint baseless.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the decision of the Council was wrong in law and in fact
- Order that AA be ordered to show cause before a court of three judges
9. Cause of Actions
- Professional Misconduct
- Breach of Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules
- Perjury
10. Practice Areas
- Professional Responsibility
- Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wee Soon Kim Anthony v Law Society | N/A | Yes | [2002] 2 SLR 455 | Singapore | Cited to establish the proposition that for a complaint against a solicitor to succeed, the complainant must show that the solicitor knew the disputed statement was false when the affidavit was prepared. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules (Cap 161, R1, 2000 Rev Ed) |
| r 56 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2000 Ed) | Singapore |
| s 96 of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 86(7) of the Act | Singapore |
| s 95(5) | Singapore |
| s 98 of the Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Legal Profession Act
- Law Society of Singapore
- Professional Conduct Rules
- Inquiry Committee
- Perjury
- Misleading the Court
- Advocate and Solicitor
- Council of the Law Society
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession Act
- Law Society
- Professional Conduct
- Solicitor Misconduct
- Perjury
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act | 90 |
| Professional Ethics | 70 |
| Evidence Law | 40 |
| Misrepresentation | 30 |
| Contract Law | 20 |
| Contempt of Court | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Professional Responsibility
- Judicial Review