Yip Kok Seng v Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board: Ultra Vires & Jurisdiction in TCM Complaint Investigation
In Yip Kok Seng v Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board, the High Court of Singapore addressed whether the Board acted ultra vires in investigating complaints against Mr. Yip, a registered acupuncturist. Mr. Yip sought declarations that the Board lacked jurisdiction to investigate a complaint and had acted ultra vires by acting on another complaint without a statutory declaration. The court dismissed the application, finding that the Board's officer's power to investigate was circumscribed by the Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Act, but the Board could conduct investigations without a complaint.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court held that the Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board's investigation was not ultra vires, but clarified the scope of its investigatory powers.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yip Kok Seng | Plaintiff | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board | Defendant | Statutory Board | Application Dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| P Padman | K S Chia Gurdeep & Param |
| Mark Cheng | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Rebecca Chew | Rajah & Tann LLP |
4. Facts
- Mr. Yip, a registered acupuncturist, runs a wellness centre.
- [B] complained that Mr. Yip checked her private parts during a session.
- The Board sent an Inspection Officer to investigate the complaint.
- The Board requested a statutory declaration from [B].
- [B] lodged a complaint with a statutory declaration.
- The Board notified Mr. Yip of the complaint and invited his explanation.
- The Board directed the matter to be referred to an Investigation Committee.
5. Formal Citations
- Yip Kok Seng v Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board, Originating Summons No 113 of 2010, [2010] SGHC 226
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Complaint made by [B] to the Board | |
| Inspection Officer of the Board sent to the Centre | |
| Board replied to [B] regarding statutory declaration | |
| [B] lodged complaint with statutory declaration | |
| Mr Yip notified of complaint | |
| Correspondence between Mr Yip and the Board began | |
| Correspondence between Mr Yip and the Board ended | |
| Mr Yip inquired about the status of the complaint | |
| Board directed matter to be referred to an IC | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Jurisdiction of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Board
- Outcome: The court held that the Board's officer's power to investigate under s 30(1) of the Act is circumscribed by that provision and it did not empower Mr Toh to inspect medical records.
- Category: Jurisdictional
- Sub-Issues:
- Scope of investigatory powers
- Requirement of statutory declaration
- Ultra Vires Action
- Outcome: The court declined to make a declaration that the Board acted ultra vires.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Acting on complaint without statutory declaration
- Investigating conduct outside TCM practice
- Appropriateness of Declaratory Relief
- Outcome: The court decided that declaratory relief was appropriate for the complaints made by Mr Yip and that he was not required to proceed by way of Order 53 to obtain certiorari.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Availability of certiorari
- Bifurcated procedural regime
8. Remedies Sought
- Declaration that the Board lacks jurisdiction
- Declaration that the Board acted ultra vires
- Restraint of Investigation Committee hearings
- Referral of complaint to the police
9. Cause of Actions
- Declaration that the Board lacks jurisdiction
- Declaration that the Board acted ultra vires
10. Practice Areas
- Regulatory Compliance
- Healthcare Law
11. Industries
- Healthcare
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Re Application by Dow Jones (Asia) Inc | High Court | Yes | [1987] SLR(R) 627 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that declaratory relief is not available under Order 53. |
| Chan Hiang Leng Colin v Minister for Information and the Arts | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR(R) 294 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that declaratory relief is not available under Order 53. |
| O’Reilly v Mackman | N/A | Yes | [1983] 2 AC 237 | England | Cited for a detailed consideration of procedural issues regarding prerogative and ordinary remedies. |
| YAB Dato’ Dr Zambry bin Abd Kadir & ors v YB Sivakumar a/l Varatharaju Naidu (Attorney General Malaysia, Intervener) | N/A | Yes | [2009] 4 MLJ 24 | Malaysia | Cited to support the principle that an application for a declaration can sometimes be made by ordinary action. |
| Chan Hiang Leng Colin v PP | High Court | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR(R) 209 | Singapore | Cited regarding the applicability of O’Reilly and the court's competence to decide issues raised. |
| Barnard v National Dock Labour Board | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1953] 2 QB 18 | England | Cited for the advantages of a declaration over certiorari. |
| Vine v National Dock Labour Board | N/A | Yes | [1957] AC 488 | England | Cited as a case where declaratory relief was granted. |
| Pyx Granite Co Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government | N/A | Yes | [1960] AC 260 | England | Cited as a case where declaratory relief was granted. |
| Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation | N/A | Yes | [1969] 2 AC 147 | England | Cited in support of the proposition that a plaintiff could choose whether to apply for a prerogative writ or to sue for a declaration. |
| Teh Guan Teik v Inspector General of Police & anor | N/A | Yes | [1998] 3 MLJ 137 | Malaysia | Cited to support the principle that declaration and certiorari are not mutually exclusive and are concurrent remedies. |
| Punton and another v Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance (No 2) | N/A | Yes | [1964] 1 All ER 448 | England | Cited regarding the court's jurisdiction to grant a declaration. |
| Eshah Binte Sa’at v Meriam Binte Sa’at & ors | N/A | Yes | [1975] 2 MLJ 97 | Malaysia | Cited regarding factors the court considers when exercising its discretion to grant a declaration. |
| Drilex Systems Pte Ltd v Registrar of Companies & anor | N/A | Yes | [1989] 2 SLR(R) 511 | Singapore | Cited regarding the argument that allowing a party to proceed by way of an ordinary originating summons would encourage future litigants to circumvent Order 53. |
| Wong Keng Leong Rayney v Law Society of Singapore | N/A | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 934 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it should be for the Investigation Committee to decide in the first instance whether it has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter brought before it. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2006 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Act (Cap 333A, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Traditional Chinese Medicine
- Acupuncturist
- Ultra vires
- Statutory declaration
- Investigation Committee
- Healing session
- Jurisdiction
- Certiorari
- Declaratory relief
15.2 Keywords
- Traditional Chinese Medicine
- Practitioners Board
- Ultra vires
- Jurisdiction
- Complaint
- Investigation
- Acupuncturist
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Traditional Chinese Medicine Law | 85 |
| Administrative Law | 70 |
| Professional Liability | 60 |
| Professional Ethics | 60 |
| Ultra vires | 50 |
| Criminal Law | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Administrative Law
- Healthcare Regulation
- Traditional Chinese Medicine