Law Society v Ravi Madasamy: Disciplinary Proceedings for Non-Practicing Solicitor's Misconduct
In Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, the Court of Three Judges addressed an application by the Law Society of Singapore against Ravi s/o Madasamy, a non-practicing solicitor, for misconduct under the Legal Profession Act. The court found due cause for disciplinary action and prohibited Madasamy from applying for a practicing certificate for two years, citing the need to protect the public and uphold confidence in the legal profession, despite mitigating circumstances related to Madasamy's mental condition.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Three Judges of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Respondent is prohibited from applying for a practicing certificate for a period of two years.
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Law Society sought disciplinary action against Ravi Madasamy, a non-practicing solicitor, for misconduct. The court prohibited him from applying for a practicing certificate for two years.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Law Society of Singapore | Applicant | Statutory Board | Application Granted | Won | |
| Ravi s/o Madasamy | Respondent | Individual | Prohibited from applying for a practicing certificate | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The Law Society directed the Respondent to stop practicing due to concerns about his mental condition.
- The Respondent made inappropriate statements and acted in an unruly manner at the Law Society's premises.
- The Respondent sent an email to The Straits Times with allegations against another solicitor.
- The Respondent made remarks concerning the President of the Law Society and his family members on Facebook.
- The Respondent falsely alleged that Mr. Pradeep Pillai assaulted him after a court hearing.
- The Respondent suffers from Bipolar I Disorder (Severe) with anxious distress.
- The Respondent was experiencing a hypomanic episode during the period when the misconduct occurred.
5. Formal Citations
- Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, Originating Summons No 265 of 2015(Summons No 504 of 2016), [2016] SGHC 242
- Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, , [2015] 3 SLR 1187
- The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, , [2015] SGDT 5
- The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, , [2016] SGDT 7
- The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, , [2012] SGDT 12
- The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy, , [2014] SGDT 6
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Council of the Law Society issued a direction to suspend the Respondent from practice. | |
| Respondent appeared at the Law Society’s premises and made inappropriate statements. | |
| Respondent sent an email to The Straits Times with allegations against another solicitor. | |
| Council wrote to the Respondent demanding an apology. | |
| Respondent discharged from Mount Elizabeth Hospital. | |
| Council applied to the High Court for an order requiring the Respondent to submit to a medical examination. | |
| Respondent made remarks concerning the President of the Law Society on Facebook. | |
| Hearing for Council's application for medical examination. | |
| Court ordered that the Respondent be suspended from practice until further order. | |
| Respondent made allegations against Mr. Pradeep Pillai on Facebook. | |
| Respondent responded to the Law Society’s demand for an apology. | |
| Respondent sent letters of apology to Mr. Phan, Mr. Thio, Professor Thio Su Mien, Professor Thio Li-ann, and Mr. Pillai. | |
| Leave was granted pursuant to s 82A(6) of the LPA. | |
| Disciplinary Tribunal heard the matter over two days in August 2015. | |
| DT 12/2015 proceedings concluded. | |
| Matter came before the court for hearing. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Misconduct Unbefitting an Advocate and Solicitor
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent's conduct constituted misconduct unbefitting an advocate and solicitor.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Inappropriate statements
- Unruly behavior
- False allegations
- Appropriate Sanction for Misconduct
- Outcome: The court prohibited the Respondent from applying for a practicing certificate for two years.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Mitigating circumstances
- Mental condition
- Public interest
- Due Cause for Disciplinary Action
- Outcome: The court found that due cause for disciplinary action had been shown.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Disciplinary Action
- Prohibition from Applying for Practicing Certificate
9. Cause of Actions
- Professional Misconduct
10. Practice Areas
- Professional Responsibility
- Regulatory Compliance
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | High Court | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 1187 | Singapore | Cited for granting leave for a Disciplinary Tribunal to be appointed to investigate complaints of misconduct against the Respondent. |
| The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | Disciplinary Tribunal | Yes | [2015] SGDT 5 | Singapore | Cited for the Disciplinary Tribunal's conclusion that there was cause of sufficient gravity for disciplinary action to be taken against the Respondent. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Jasmine Gowrimani d/o Daniel | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 390 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a finding of misconduct under s 82A(3)(a) of the LPA is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a finding of 'due cause'. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra Samuel | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 266 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing considerations in disciplinary proceedings, including protection of the public, upholding public confidence, deterrence, and punishment. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Chiong Chin May Selena | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2005] 4 SLR(R) 320 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the interest of the public is paramount in disciplinary proceedings. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Kurubalan s/o Manickam Rengaraju | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 91 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that mitigating factors carry less weight in disciplinary proceedings than in criminal proceedings. |
| Re Knight Glenn Jeyasingam | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR(R) 366 | Singapore | Cited for the court's inherent sentencing discretion to consider factors that diminish the personal culpability of the errant solicitor. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Amdad Hussein Lawrence | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR(R) 23 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the interests of the legal profession and the protection of the public demand that members of the profession observe the highest possible standards of conduct. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ahmad Khalis bin Abdul Ghani | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR 308 | Singapore | Cited for the importance of public confidence in the competence and professionalism of lawyers. |
| The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | Disciplinary Tribunal | Yes | [2016] SGDT 7 | Singapore | Cited for a separate set of disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent. |
| The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | Disciplinary Tribunal | Yes | [2012] SGDT 12 | Singapore | Cited for a set of disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent. |
| The Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | Disciplinary Tribunal | Yes | [2014] SGDT 6 | Singapore | Cited for a set of disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent. |
| Tan Chor Jin v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 306 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an offender of unsound mind will not be convicted. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chong Hou En | High Court | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 222 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that diminished culpability due to a mental condition may be a mitigating factor in sentencing. |
| Madras Electric Supply Corporation Ld v Boarland (Inspector of Taxes) | House of Lords | Yes | [1955] AC 667 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that the same word or words used within the same piece of legislation would ordinarily be used in the same sense, but this must yield to the requirements of the context. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Legal Profession (Solicitors’ Accounts) Rules (Cap 161, R 8, 1999 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(5) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(10) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(1) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(4) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(6) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 82A(3)(a) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 82A(12) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 25C(7) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 25C(8) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 25C(1) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 25 of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 33 of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 25A of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 27A of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 27B(b) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 93(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 93 of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 94 of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| Section 84 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Exception 7 of s 300 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Non-practicing solicitor
- Misconduct unbefitting an advocate and solicitor
- Disciplinary proceedings
- Hypomanic episode
- Mental condition
- Practicing certificate
- Due cause
- Public confidence
- Legal Profession Act
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession
- Disciplinary Proceedings
- Misconduct
- Non-practicing Solicitor
- Mental Health
- Singapore Law
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Legal Profession
- Disciplinary Proceedings
- Mental Health
- Regulatory Law