Leow Kwee Huay v Public Accountants Oversight Committee: Appeal Against Cancellation of Accountant Registration
Leow Kwee Huay appealed to the High Court of Singapore against the Public Accountants Oversight Committee's (PAOC) decision to cancel her registration as a public accountant. The PAOC's decision was based on Leow's conviction for forgery. Choo Han Teck J allowed the appeal, finding the cancellation manifestly excessive, and substituted it with a two-year suspension.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal against the Public Accountants Oversight Committee's decision to cancel Leow Kwee Huay's registration as a public accountant. Appeal allowed; two-year suspension substituted.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leow Kwee Huay | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
| Public Accountants Oversight Committee | Respondent | Government Agency | Cancellation of registration substituted with suspension | Partial | Lim Jen Hui of Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Chia Jin Chong Daniel | Coleman Street Chambers LLC |
| Lim Jen Hui | Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority |
4. Facts
- The appellant was an audit manager at Er & Co.
- The appellant was registered as a certified public accountant on 4 September 2008.
- ACRA received a complaint from Mr Er Boon Chiew alleging misconduct by the appellant.
- The appellant was convicted on seven charges of forgery and sentenced to five days’ imprisonment.
- The PAOC agreed with the disciplinary committee and issued an order to cancel the appellant’s registration as a public accountant.
- The appellant signed audited financial statements without proper authorization.
- The forged financial statements were submitted to regulatory bodies in Singapore.
5. Formal Citations
- Leow Kwee Huay v Public Accountants Oversight Committee, Tribunal Appeal No 1 of 2016, [2016] SGHC 180
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant registered as a certified public accountant | |
| Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority received a complaint from Mr Er Boon Chiew | |
| Appellant charged for forgery and criminal breach of trust | |
| Disciplinary committee constituted | |
| ACRA laid five charges before the disciplinary committee | |
| Appellant convicted on seven charges of forgery | |
| Appeal against conviction dismissed | |
| Appellant informed disciplinary committee she did not intend to contest amended charges | |
| ACCA disciplinary proceedings heard | |
| Formal inquiry hearing by the disciplinary committee | |
| PAOC issued an order to cancel the appellant’s registration as a public accountant | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether the PAOC’s decision to cancel the appellant’s registration as a public accountant was manifestly excessive
- Outcome: The court held that the cancellation of the appellant’s registration was manifestly excessive and substituted it with a two-year suspension.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against cancellation of registration as a public accountant
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Accountants Act
- Forgery
10. Practice Areas
- Regulatory Law
- Accountancy Law
11. Industries
- Accounting
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Kurubalan s/o Manickam Rengaraju | Court of Three Judges | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 91 | Singapore | Affirmed the view that disciplinary tribunals are not primarily punitive and mitigating circumstances have less effect than in criminal cases. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Tham Yu Xian Rick | N/A | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 68 | Singapore | Stated that orders made by a disciplinary tribunal are not primarily punitive. |
| Singapore Medical Council v Kwan Kah Yee | Court of Three Judges | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 201 | Singapore | Held that disciplinary tribunals are primarily concerned with the protection of public confidence and the reputation of the profession. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 55 Rule 2 of the Rules of Court |
| Order 55 r 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| Order 55 r 2 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Accountants Act (Cap 2) | Singapore |
| Section 52(1)(a) of the Accountants Act | Singapore |
| Section 52(2)(a) of the Accountants Act | Singapore |
| Section 52(2)(b) of the Accountants Act | Singapore |
| Section 54(1) of the Accountants Act | Singapore |
| Section 20(c) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Public accountant
- Disciplinary proceedings
- Forgery
- Cancellation of registration
- Suspension
- Manifestly excessive
- Accountants Act
- Public Accountants Oversight Committee
15.2 Keywords
- Accountant
- Disciplinary
- Forgery
- Singapore
- Regulatory
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Accountancy Law | 90 |
| Disciplinary Proceedings (Accountants) | 85 |
| Professional Ethics | 70 |
| Administrative Law | 50 |
| Criminal Law | 30 |
| Forgery | 25 |
| Contract Law | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Accountants
- Disciplinary Tribunals