Law Society of Singapore v Lau See Jin Jeffrey: Disciplinary Proceedings for Contingency Fee Agreement
In Law Society of Singapore v Lau See Jin Jeffrey, the Court of Three Judges heard an application by the Law Society of Singapore for sanctions against Lau See Jin Jeffrey, an advocate and solicitor, for violating the Legal Profession Act by entering into a contingency fee agreement with Ms. Serene Ng Phei Li. The Disciplinary Tribunal found Lau guilty, and the Court of Three Judges affirmed this decision, finding that Lau had indeed entered into a prohibited contingency fee agreement. The court ordered that Lau See Jin Jeffrey be suspended from practice for 12 months.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Three Judges of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Respondent suspended from practice for 12 months.
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Law Society brought disciplinary action against Lau See Jin Jeffrey for entering into a prohibited contingency fee agreement. The Court suspended Lau from practice for 12 months.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore | Applicant | Statutory Board | Application granted | Won | |
| Lau See Jin Jeffrey | Respondent | Individual | Suspended from practice | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- The Complainant approached the Respondent for legal advice on a medical negligence claim.
- The Complainant and Respondent met to discuss the case, sometimes in the presence of Mr. Lee.
- The Complainant expressed concerns about incurring substantial legal fees.
- Mr. Lee suggested the Complainant offer a share of damages to the Respondent in lieu of regular legal fees.
- The Complainant proposed a 15% share of damages, but the Respondent negotiated for 20%.
- The Respondent requested a $5,000 deposit to cover disbursements.
- The Complainant terminated the engagement due to a lack of progress and sought a refund of the deposit.
5. Formal Citations
- Law Society of Singapore v Lau See Jin Jeffrey, Originating Summons No 7 of 2016, [2017] SGHC 30
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Meeting between Complainant and Respondent where contingency fee agreement was allegedly entered into. | |
| Complainant handed Respondent a cheque of $5,000 as deposit. | |
| Complainant terminated engagement with Respondent and sought refund of $5,000 deposit. | |
| Complaint made to the Law Society. | |
| Disciplinary Tribunal heard the matter. | |
| Disciplinary Tribunal issued written decision. | |
| Court of Three Judges delivered judgment. | |
| Suspension to take effect. |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Legal Profession Act
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent had breached the Legal Profession Act by entering into a contingency fee agreement.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 4 SLR 91
- Contingency Fee Agreement
- Outcome: The court held that the contingency fee agreement was in breach of the Legal Profession Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 4 SLR 91
8. Remedies Sought
- Disciplinary action against the Respondent
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Legal Profession Act
10. Practice Areas
- Regulatory Law
- Professional Conduct
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Kurubalan s/o Manickam | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 91 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that contingency fee agreements are prohibited under the Legal Profession Act. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Manjit Singh s/o Kirpal Singh and another | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 829 | Singapore | Cited for the standard of appellate intervention in disciplinary proceedings. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Lim Cheong Peng | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 360 | Singapore | Cited regarding appellate court interference with findings of fact by a lower court or disciplinary committee. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Tan Phuay Khiang | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 477 | Singapore | Cited for the importance of keeping accurate and contemporaneous attendance notes. |
| Lie Hendri Rusli v Wong Tan & Molly Lim (a firm) | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2004] 4 SLR(R) 594 | Singapore | Cited regarding adverse inference against a solicitor for failing to keep accurate attendance notes. |
| Otech Pakistan Pvt Ltd v Clough Engineering Ltd | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 989 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of champerty. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Chiong Chin May Selena | Singapore High Court | Yes | [2005] 4 SLR(R) 320 | Singapore | Cited regarding the extraordinary responsibilities of solicitors. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015 (Cap 161, R 1, 2009 Rev Ed) |
| r 3 of the Professional Conduct Rules 2015 |
| r 17(3) of the Professional Conduct Rules 2015 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 94(1) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 98(1) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 83(1) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 83(2)(b) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 107(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 107(3) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 109(4) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
| s 111(1) of the Legal Profession Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Contingency fee agreement
- Legal Profession Act
- Disciplinary Tribunal
- Sanction
- Suspension
- Champerty
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession Act
- Contingency Fee
- Disciplinary Action
- Law Society
- Singapore
- Suspension
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Professional Responsibility
- Contingency Fees