Narindar Singh Kang v Law Society: Reinstatement to Roll After Corruption Conviction
Narindar Singh Kang applied to the High Court of Singapore for reinstatement to the roll of advocates and solicitors, having been struck off in 1997 following a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Law Society of Singapore and the Attorney-General raised objections. The court, comprising Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, Belinda Ang Saw Ean J, and V K Rajah JA, dismissed the application as premature, citing the seriousness of the original offense and the need to maintain public confidence in the legal profession.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed as premature.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Narindar Singh Kang applied for reinstatement to the roll of advocates and solicitors after being struck off for corruption. The application was dismissed as premature.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Narindar Singh Kang | Applicant | Individual | Application Dismissed | Dismissed | Peter Cuthbert Low |
| Law Society of Singapore | Respondent | Statutory Board | Neutral | Neutral | Sharmini Yogarajah |
| Attorney-General | Other | Government Agency | Objection Upheld | Lost | Valerie Thean |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| V K Rajah | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Peter Cuthbert Low | Peter Low Partnership |
| Sharmini Yogarajah | Haridass Ho & Partners |
| Valerie Thean | Attorney-General's Chambers |
4. Facts
- The Applicant was struck off the roll on 3 October 1997 due to a corruption conviction.
- The Applicant was convicted under Section 5(a)(i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for soliciting a bribe.
- The Applicant was a lawyer of 14 years' standing and a former police officer when convicted.
- The Applicant's sentence was enhanced to 12 months' imprisonment by Yong Pung How CJ.
- The Law Society applied for the Applicant to show cause why he should not be dealt with under the Legal Profession Act.
- The Attorney-General objected to the Applicant's application for restoration to the roll.
- The Applicant submitted that he had reformed and provided testimonials in support of his application.
5. Formal Citations
- Narindar Singh Kang v Law Society of Singapore, OS 535/2007, [2007] SGHC 145
- Narindar Singh v PP, , [1996] 3 SLR 639
- Law Society of Singapore v Narindar Singh s/o Malagar Singh, , [1998] 1 SLR 328
- Knight Glenn Jeyasingam v Law Society of Singapore, , [2007] SGHC 105
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Applicant called to the Bar | |
| Applicant left Singapore Police Force | |
| Applicant joined a law firm as a legal assistant | |
| Applicant started his own legal practice | |
| Hartej Singh Sidhu and Sarjit Singh s/o Anokh Singh sentenced to death | |
| Applicant and Rajah visited Changi Prison | |
| Applicant convicted of corruption | |
| Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed; sentence enhanced to 12 months | |
| Applicant struck off the roll | |
| Applicant started work as a legal consultant for Kim An Shipping Co Pte Ltd | |
| Applicant joined Sunrise & Co Pte Ltd | |
| Applicant underwent coronary bypass operation | |
| Kim An relocated to Thailand; Applicant started a small trading company | |
| Application for reinstatement dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Reinstatement to Roll of Advocates and Solicitors
- Outcome: The court held that the applicant's reinstatement was premature due to the seriousness of his prior corruption conviction and the need to maintain public confidence in the legal profession.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Fitness for restoration to roll
- Public interest considerations
- Seriousness of prior misconduct
8. Remedies Sought
- Restoration to the roll of advocates and solicitors
9. Cause of Actions
- Application for Reinstatement to Roll
10. Practice Areas
- Reinstatement Proceedings
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Narindar Singh v PP | High Court | Yes | [1996] 3 SLR 639 | Singapore | Cited for enhancing the applicant's sentence to 12 months' imprisonment, highlighting the seriousness of the corruption offence. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Narindar Singh s/o Malagar Singh | Court of Three Judges | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR 328 | Singapore | Cited for the decision to strike the applicant off the roll due to his willingness to assist in getting a bribe, which implied a defect of character. |
| Knight Glenn Jeyasingam v Law Society of Singapore | High Court | Yes | [2007] SGHC 105 | Singapore | Distinguished from the present case due to the nature of the charges, the length of time passed since being struck off, and the extent of peer support. |
| PP v Datuk Haji Harun bin Haji Idris [No 2 | N/A | Yes | [1977] 1 MLJ 15 | N/A | Cited to highlight the inadequacy of a fine for corruption, referencing a case where a senior political leader received a custodial sentence. |
| Re Ram Kishan | N/A | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR 529 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the onus is on the applicant to convince the court of their integrity and honour. |
| Re Lim Cheng Peng | N/A | Yes | [1987] SLR 486 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court may order restoration 'if it thinks fit' and that a discretion is conferred by the legislature, which must be exercised judicially. |
| Re Chan Chow Wang | N/A | Yes | [1982-1983] SLR 413 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that sentences of exclusion from the legal profession need not be exclusive forever. |
| Re Nirmal Singh s/o Fauja Singh | N/A | Yes | [2001] 3 SLR 608 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court must consider the protection of the interests of the public and the profession as a whole over the interests of the applicant. |
| Re Gnaguru s/o Thamboo Mylvaganam | High Court | Yes | [2004] SGHC 180 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where a significantly longer period than five years should have passed before an applicant may seek to be restored as an advocate and solicitor. |
| Jeyaretnam JB v Law Society of Singapore | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council | Yes | [1988] SLR 1 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the proceedings on the summons to show cause was 'clearly not mandatory but directory only'. |
| Anwar Siraj v Tang I Fang | High Court | Yes | [1982-1983] SLR 242 | Singapore | Cited for the application of a similar provision in the Jurong Town Corporation Act. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Tan Buck Chye Dave | N/A | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR 581 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the very nature of the professional misconduct involved in the present proceedings is serious. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra Samuel | Singapore High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 696 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a further consideration must be what course should the court take to protect the public and to register its disapproval of the conduct of the solicitor. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ong Ying Ping | N/A | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR 583 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there is an inherent, irreducible and non-negotiable public interest in the administration of justice in its multifarious forms. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ahmad Khalis bin Abdul Ghani | N/A | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the legal profession is a noble one – one that exists to serve the ends of justice and fairness. |
| Bolton v Law Society | English Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 1 WLR 512 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the essential issue is the need to maintain among members of the public a well-founded confidence that any solicitor whom they instruct will be a person of unquestionable integrity, probity and trustworthiness. |
| Ex parte Brounsall | N/A | Yes | (1778) 2 Cowp 829; 98 ER 1385 | England | Cited for the principle that the issue of punishment is irrelevant to such an application. |
| Greg Gregory v Queensland Law Society Incorporated | Supreme Court of Queensland | Yes | [2001] QCA 499 | Australia | Cited for the principle that the issue of punishment is irrelevant to such an application. |
| Incorporated Law Institute of New South Wales v Richard Denis Meagher | Australian High Court | Yes | (1909) 9 CLR 655 | Australia | Cited as an example of a case where the applicant might conduct himself or herself in a manner that renders it impossible for the court to consider it appropriate to restore him or her to the roll. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Section 102 Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 5(a) Prevention of Corruption Act | Singapore |
| Section 5 Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 24 Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 38(1) Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Reinstatement
- Roll of advocates and solicitors
- Corruption
- Professional misconduct
- Public interest
- Legal Profession Act
- Rehabilitation
- Fitness to practice
- Administration of justice
15.2 Keywords
- Reinstatement
- Legal Profession
- Corruption
- Singapore
- Law Society
- Advocate
- Solicitor
16. Subjects
- Legal Profession
- Ethics
- Disciplinary Proceedings
17. Areas of Law
- Legal Profession
- Professional Conduct