Shepherdson v Singapore Recreation Club: Societies Act, Unincorporated Associations & Trade Unions

Terence Christopher Shepherdson, a member of the Singapore Recreation Club (SRC), filed an action in the High Court of Singapore against SRC, challenging his suspension and fine imposed due to his conduct at the 2016 Annual General Meeting. Shepherdson sought to set aside the disciplinary decision and claim damages. The High Court, presided over by Woo Bih Li J, declared the suspension and fine null and void, citing apparent bias in the Management Committee's handling of Shepherdson's appeal. The court ordered SRC to pay damages, to be assessed by the Registrar of the Supreme Court.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application granted; suspension and fine declared null and void and set aside.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Shepherdson sues Singapore Recreation Club (SRC) after being suspended for conduct at an AGM. The court declared the suspension and fine void due to apparent bias.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Shepherdson, Terence ChristopherPlaintiffIndividualApplication GrantedWonGanesh S Ramanathan
Singapore Recreation ClubDefendantAssociationSuspension and Fine NullifiedLostFoo Soon Yien, Thaddeus Oh

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Woo Bih LiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ganesh S RamanathanKaruppan Chettiar & Partners
Foo Soon YienBernard & Rada Law Corporation
Thaddeus OhBernard & Rada Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. Shepherdson (S) was a member of the Singapore Recreation Club (SRC).
  2. S was suspended by SRC for one year and fined $1,000 for his conduct at the 2016 AGM.
  3. S interrupted Sarbjit, the chairman, at the 2016 AGM, arguing for immediate voting after a quorum was reached.
  4. Shawn, Maxwell, and Elizabeth filed complaints against S regarding his conduct at the 2016 AGM.
  5. The Complaints Committee (CC) recommended that S be charged for boisterous and unruly conduct.
  6. The Disciplinary Committee (DC) found S guilty of two charges and recommended the suspension and fine.
  7. The Management Committee (MC) upheld the DC’s decision, but four members recused themselves.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Shepherdson, Terence Christopher v Singapore Recreation Club, Originating Summons No 218 of 2017, [2017] SGHC 323

6. Timeline

DateEvent
2016 Annual General Meeting of SRC held.
Shawn Chua sent a written complaint to SRC about S’ conduct at the 2016 AGM.
Maxwell Norbert Fernando sent a written complaint to SRC about S’ conduct at the 2016 AGM.
Elizabeth Paul sent a written complaint to SRC about S’ conduct at the 2016 AGM.
SRC wrote to inform S about Shawn’s complaint.
SRC wrote to S to inform him of the complaints of Maxwell and Elizabeth.
S sent an email to SRC to request a copy of the complaints of Maxwell and Elizabeth.
S sent a letter to SRC to respond to the three complaints.
SRC sent two emails to S regarding the complaints.
Shawn Chua passed away.
SRC wrote to S to inform him that the CC would convene on 30 August 2016.
The Complaints Committee convened and issued a report.
The Rules and Membership Sub-Committee considered the CC Report and nominated Amarjeet as Chairman of the DC.
Sarbjit submitted a statement to the RMSC about S’ conduct at the 2016 AGM.
The MC approved the nominations of the DC members.
SRC wrote to S to inform him of the outcome of the hearing by the CC and the date of the inquiry by the DC.
The DC hearing was held.
The DC issued its written report.
SRC wrote to S to notify him of the DC’s decision.
S’ lawyers wrote to SRC to state that S was appealing against the decision of the DC.
The MC held a meeting to consider the appeal.
SRC wrote to inform S of the MC’s decision.
S commenced the present action.
S’ action was heard by the court.
S’ action was heard by the court.
Judgment Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Bias in Disciplinary Proceedings
    • Outcome: The court found apparent bias in the MC's handling of the appeal, leading to the decision to set aside the suspension and fine.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Apparent bias
      • Actual bias
      • Conflict of interest
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 3 SLR 541
  2. Interpretation of Club Rules
    • Outcome: The court offered its opinion on the interpretation of Rule 35(e)(ii) of the SRC's Constitution, suggesting that members should be allowed to vote immediately after a quorum is reached.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [1996] 1 SLR(R) 654

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Declaration that the suspension and fine are null and void
  2. Damages

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Natural Justice
  • Judicial Review

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation
  • Dispute Resolution

11. Industries

  • Recreation

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Hilborne v Singapore Island Country ClubHigh CourtYes[1996] 1 SLR(R) 654SingaporeCited regarding the interpretation of club rules using established practices of the club.
Sim Yong Teng and another v Singapore Swimming ClubN/AYes[2015] 3 SLR 541SingaporeCited for the principle that no man should be a judge in his own cause.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Societies Act (Cap 311, 2014 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Annual General Meeting
  • Disciplinary Committee
  • Management Committee
  • Recusal
  • Bias
  • Point of Order
  • Quorum
  • Constitution
  • Disciplinary Action

15.2 Keywords

  • Singapore Recreation Club
  • SRC
  • Shepherdson
  • Suspension
  • Fine
  • AGM
  • Bias
  • Societies Act
  • Unincorporated Associations

16. Subjects

  • Club Governance
  • Disciplinary Proceedings
  • Administrative Law

17. Areas of Law

  • Societies Act
  • Unincorporated Associations and Trade Unions
  • Friendly Societies