Law Society v Rasif David: Lawyer Misappropriation & Professional Misconduct

In Law Society of Singapore v Rasif David, the High Court of Singapore ordered Rasif David to be struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors for grossly improper conduct. David misappropriated client funds and failed to maintain proper records. The Law Society brought a show cause action against David, who was absent from the proceedings. The court found David's actions constituted a breach of the Legal Profession Act and the Legal Profession (Solicitors' Accounts) Rules, warranting the striking-off order.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

The Law Society’s application was granted and the respondent was ordered to be struck off the roll of the advocates and solicitors of the Supreme Court of Singapore.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Rasif David, a lawyer, was struck off the roll for misappropriating client funds and failing to maintain proper records, highlighting ethical standards.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Law Society of SingaporeApplicantStatutory BoardApplication GrantedWon
Rasif DavidRespondentIndividualStruck off the rollLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Andrew Phang Boon LeongJustice of the Court of AppealYes
V K RajahJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Tan Lee MengJudgeNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Tan Chuan ThyeWong & Leow LLC
Chia Yijuan GermaineWong & Leow LLC
Lau Wai MingWong & Leow LLC

4. Facts

  1. The respondent, Rasif David, was a sole proprietor of David Rasif & Partners (DRP).
  2. DRP was retained by a married couple to act for them in their purchase of a property.
  3. The Clients issued a cheque for $10,658,240.00 to DRP for the property purchase.
  4. The respondent made numerous unauthorized withdrawals from the client account totaling $11,327,408.00.
  5. The withdrawals were discovered when staff received envelopes containing cheques drawn on DRP's office account.
  6. Attempts to contact the respondent failed, and he absconded with the misappropriated funds.
  7. The Law Society intervened in the practice of DRP and appointed Grant Thornton to review the accounts.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Law Society of Singapore v Rasif David, OS 1204/2007, SUM 4059/2007, [2008] SGHC 14

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Respondent called to the Bar
DRP retained by Clients to act for them in their purchase of a property
Clients issued a cheque for the sum of $10,658,240.00 in favour of DRP
Sum of $10,658,240.00 received into the Client Account
Sum of $10,653,240.00 was withdrawn from the Client Account and transferred to the Fixed Deposit Account
Sum of $10,653,240.00 was deposited back into the Client Account
Numerous unauthorised withdrawals of large sums of money from the Client Account
Numerous unauthorised withdrawals of large sums of money from the Client Account
Withdrawals were discovered
Matter was immediately referred to Ms Yashodhara Dhoraisingam, Consultant Director for Professional Standards of the Law Society
Council intervened in the practice of DRP and the Client Account
Law Society wrote to Maybank to inform the latter that it was intervening in respect of, inter alia, the Client Account
Grant Thornton Specialist Services Pte Ltd was appointed to review the books and records of DRP’s accounts
Disciplinary Committee was appointed by the Honourable the Chief Justice
Disciplinary Committee hearing commenced
Show cause order made
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Grossly Improper Conduct
    • Outcome: The court found that the respondent's actions constituted grossly improper conduct within the meaning of s 83(2)(b) of the Legal Profession Act.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Misappropriation of client funds
      • Failure to maintain proper accounting records
      • Breach of professional duty
    • Related Cases:
      • [1972-1974] SLR 132
      • [1993] 2 SLR 81
      • [2001] 3 SLR 616
      • [2001] 1 SLR 701
      • [2005] 4 SLR 320
  2. Breach of Solicitors' Accounts Rules
    • Outcome: The court found that the respondent's failure to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Rules amounted to grossly improper conduct.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to record transactions
      • Failure to maintain proper books and accounts
    • Related Cases:
      • [2001] 1 SLR 701
      • [2005] 4 SLR 320

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Striking off from the roll of advocates and solicitors

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of professional duty
  • Misappropriation of funds

10. Practice Areas

  • Disciplinary Proceedings

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Re Marshall DavidHigh CourtYes[1972-1974] SLR 132SingaporeCited for the definition of 'grossly improper conduct' as conduct dishonourable to the solicitor as a man and in his profession.
Re Han Ngiap JuanHigh CourtYes[1993] 2 SLR 81SingaporeCited as an example of a case where the definition of 'grossly improper conduct' was applied.
Re Lim Kiap KheeHigh CourtYes[2001] 3 SLR 616SingaporeCited as an example of a case where the definition of 'grossly improper conduct' was applied.
Law Society of Singapore v Lim Yee KaiHigh CourtYes[2001] 1 SLR 701SingaporeCited as a case where breaches of the SAR amounted to 'grossly improper conduct' and the lawyer was struck off the roll.
Law Society of Singapore v Chiong Chin May SelenaHigh CourtYes[2005] 4 SLR 320SingaporeCited as a case where breaches of the SAR amounted to 'grossly improper conduct'.
Law Society of Singapore v Tham Yu Xian RickHigh CourtYes[1999] 4 SLR 168SingaporeCited for the functions of disciplinary action under s 83 of the Legal Profession Act.
Law Society of Singapore v Lau See-Jin JeffreyHigh CourtYes[1999] 2 SLR 215SingaporeCited for the functions of disciplinary action under s 83 of the Legal Profession Act.
Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra SamuelHigh CourtYes[1999] 1 SLR 696SingaporeCited for the considerations in disciplinary proceedings, including protecting the public and maintaining the standards of the profession.
Law Society of Singapore v Ahmad Khalis bin Abdul GhaniHigh CourtYes[2006] 4 SLR 308SingaporeCited for the paramount importance of public interest in deterring misconduct by solicitors.
Law Society of Singapore v Ong Ying PingHigh CourtYes[2005] 3 SLR 583SingaporeCited for the inherent public interest in the administration of justice.
Narindar Singh Kang v Law Society of SingaporeHigh CourtYes[2007] 4 SLR 641SingaporeCited for emphasizing the public interest in disciplinary processes.
Bolton v Law SocietySolicitors Disciplinary TribunalYes[1994] 1 WLR 512England and WalesCited for the principle that solicitors who act dishonestly must expect severe sanctions, including being struck off the roll.
Law Society of Singapore v Caines CollinHigh CourtYes[2004] SGHC 250SingaporeCited as an instance where a solicitor was struck off the roll for misappropriating substantial amounts of client money.
Law Society of Singapore v VCS VardanHigh CourtYes[1999] 2 SLR 229SingaporeCited as an instance where a solicitor was struck off the roll for misappropriating client money.
Law Society of Singapore v Tay Eng Kwee EdwinHigh CourtYes[2007] 4 SLR 171SingaporeCited as a case where a lawyer was struck off the roll for failing to maintain the requisite accounting records.
In re A SolicitorHigh CourtYes(1962) 3 MC 323MalaysiaCited for the principle that the legal profession owes the public a duty to conduct business, particularly financial matters, beyond suspicion.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Legal Profession (Solicitors' Accounts) Rules (Cap 161, R 8, 1999 Rev Ed)
Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules (Cap 161, R 1, 2000 Rev Ed)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2001 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Misappropriation
  • Client account
  • Solicitors' Accounts Rules
  • Grossly improper conduct
  • Professional misconduct
  • Show cause order
  • Disciplinary proceedings
  • Breach of trust
  • Intervention
  • Absconded

15.2 Keywords

  • Law Society
  • Rasif David
  • Misappropriation
  • Client Funds
  • Professional Misconduct
  • Solicitor
  • Singapore
  • Legal Profession Act
  • Solicitors' Accounts Rules

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Legal Profession Act95
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility90
Misappropriation of Funds90
Professional Misconduct80
Breach of Trust75
Fraud and Deceit70
White Collar Crime60
Administrative Law30

16. Subjects

  • Legal Ethics
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Fiduciary Duty