Nalpon Zero Geraldo Mario v Law Society of Singapore: Extension of Time & Judicial Review Application
In Nalpon Zero Geraldo Mario v Law Society of Singapore, the High Court of Singapore heard an originating summons filed by Mr. Nalpon seeking leave for judicial review of the Law Society's decision to dismiss his complaint against Mr. Thio. The court dismissed the application, finding that Mr. Nalpon failed to adequately account for the delay in filing the application and that the substantive merits of the application did not warrant granting leave for judicial review.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Judicial Review
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed Mr. Nalpon's application for extension of time and leave for judicial review against the Law Society's decision regarding a complaint against Mr. Thio.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore | Defendant | Statutory Board | Judgment for Defendant | Won | |
| Nalpon, Zero Geraldo Mario | Plaintiff | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Koh Jia Wen | WongPartnership LLP |
| Andre Maniam | WongPartnership LLP |
4. Facts
- Mr. Nalpon complained to the Law Society about Mr. Thio's message in the Singapore Law Gazette.
- The Law Society appointed a Review Committee, which directed the Council to dismiss the complaint.
- Mr. Nalpon filed an Originating Summons seeking leave to apply for a Quashing Order against the Review Committee's decision.
- The Originating Summons was filed out of time.
- Mr. Nalpon argued that the Review Committee's decision was unlawful, biased, and irrational.
- The Review Committee found that the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules cited by Mr. Nalpon were no longer applicable.
- The court found that Mr. Nalpon failed to account for the delay in filing the application to the court's satisfaction.
5. Formal Citations
- Nalpon Zero Geraldo Mario v Law Society of Singapore, Originating Summons No 149 of 2017, [2017] SGHC 206
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Student allegedly molested a girl | |
| Police officers visited the Student’s school | |
| Police released a statement | |
| Singapore Law Gazette published Mr. Thio's message | |
| Today published an article on the incident | |
| Today published another article concerning the Law Minister and Mr. Thio | |
| Mr. Nalpon made a written complaint to the Law Society | |
| Review Committee constituted | |
| Meeting between Review Committee and Mr. Nalpon | |
| Review Committee issued its report | |
| Law Society received the Review Committee report | |
| Law Society sent a copy of the report to Mr. Nalpon | |
| Mr. Nalpon sent a letter to the Law Minister | |
| Mr. Nalpon received a reply from the Ministry of Law | |
| Mr. Nalpon filed the Originating Summons | |
| WongPartnership filed a Notice of Appointment of Solicitor | |
| Pre-trial conference before Assistant Registrar James Lee | |
| Appeal and Originating Summons heard before the judge | |
| Originating Summons dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Extension of Time
- Outcome: The court refused to grant an extension of time for filing the application for judicial review.
- Category: Procedural
- Judicial Review
- Outcome: The court dismissed the application for leave to apply for a quashing order.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Extension of time for filing application
- Leave to apply for a Quashing Order
- Order for a rehearing of the complaint
9. Cause of Actions
- Judicial Review
10. Practice Areas
- Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deepak Sharma v Law Society of Singapore | High Court | Yes | [2016] 4 SLR 192 | Singapore | Cited for the test for granting leave to bring judicial review proceedings. |
| Jeyaretnam Kenneth Andrew v AG | Unknown | Yes | [2014] 1 SLR 345 | Singapore | Cited for the test for granting leave to bring judicial review proceedings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322 R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Judicial review
- Extension of time
- Quashing order
- Review committee
- Law Society
- Legal Profession Act
- Illegality
- Irrationality
- Procedural impropriety
15.2 Keywords
- Judicial review
- Law Society
- Singapore
- Legal Profession
- Complaint
- Extension of time
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Judicial Review | 90 |
| Extension of Time | 80 |
| Civil Procedure | 70 |
| Administrative Law | 60 |
| Legal Profession Act | 60 |
| Review | 50 |
| Criminal Revision | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Procedure
- Administrative Law
- Judicial Review