Re Nalpon: Judicial Review of Law Society's Review Committee Decision on Lawyer Misconduct
Zero Geraldo Mario Nalpon, a lawyer, appealed the High Court's dismissal of his application for leave to commence judicial review against the Law Society of Singapore's Review Committee's decision to dismiss his complaint against three other lawyers. The complaint stemmed from a lawsuit where Nalpon represented a defendant, Mr. Wong, against Innovez ID Pte Ltd, represented by the three lawyers. Nalpon alleged the lawyers misled the court. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no prima facie case that the Review Committee's decision was unreasonable.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal against dismissal of judicial review application concerning a Law Society Review Committee's decision on a lawyer misconduct complaint. Appeal dismissed.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zero Geraldo Mario Nalpon | Appellant, Applicant | Individual | Appeal dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | No |
| Quentin Loh | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|
4. Facts
- The appellant, a lawyer, filed a complaint with the Law Society against three other lawyers.
- The complaint arose from a lawsuit where the appellant represented a defendant against a company represented by the other lawyers.
- The appellant alleged the lawyers misled the court by advancing a falsehood on behalf of their client.
- The Law Society's Review Committee dismissed the complaint as lacking in substance.
- The appellant sought judicial review of the Review Committee's decision.
- The High Court denied leave for judicial review.
- The appellant appealed the High Court's decision.
5. Formal Citations
- Re Nalpon, Zero Geraldo Mario, Civil Appeal No 197 of 2017, [2018] SGCA 71
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Innovez ID Pte Ltd commenced an action in the High Court against Mr Wong Yoke Shin. | |
| Zero Geraldo Mario Nalpon lodged a formal complaint against the Lawyers with the Law Society. | |
| The Council of the Law Society constituted a Review Committee to examine the appellant’s complaints. | |
| The Review Committee submitted its Report to the Council. | |
| The Council informed the appellant that the Review Committee had determined that his complaints against the Lawyers should be dismissed as they were lacking in substance. | |
| The appellant filed Originating Summons 675 of 2017 in the High Court, on an ex parte basis, seeking leave to commence judicial review. | |
| OS 675 was heard. | |
| The High Court dismissed OS 675. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Judicial Review of Law Society Review Committee Decision
- Outcome: The court dismissed the appeal, finding no prima facie case that the Review Committee's decision was Wednesbury unreasonable.
- Category: Procedural
- Lawyer Misconduct
- Outcome: The court did not make a determination on whether the lawyers had engaged in misconduct, as the issue was whether the Review Committee's decision was unreasonable.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Quashing order in respect of the decision of the Review Committee
- Order that his complaint be re-heard by a fresh review committee
9. Cause of Actions
- Judicial Review
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Service Commission v Lai Swee Lin Linda | High Court | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR(R) 133 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing applications for leave to commence judicial review proceedings. |
| Wee Soon Kim Anthony v Law Society of Singapore | High Court | Yes | [1988] 1 SLR(R) 455 | Singapore | Cited regarding the duty of a solicitor to verify the source of information of his client. |
| Tang Liang Hong v Lee Kuan Yew | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR(R) 576 | Singapore | Cited to support the principle that it would be an unduly onerous burden on counsel to verify the truth of what their clients have deposed to in affidavits. |
| Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP | High Court | Yes | [2010] 4 SLR 137 | Singapore | Cited regarding counsel's duty of candour to the court. |
| Re Nalpon, Zero Geraldo Mario | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 301 | Singapore | The full grounds of the Judge’s decision can be found at Re Nalpon, Zero Geraldo Mario [2017] SGHC 301 (“the GD”). |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 53, rule 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, rule 5) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 332) | Singapore |
| Section 85(6) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Judicial Review
- Law Society
- Review Committee
- Lawyer Misconduct
- Wednesbury Unreasonableness
- Prima Facie Case
15.2 Keywords
- Judicial Review
- Law Society
- Lawyer Misconduct
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Administrative Law
- Legal Ethics
17. Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Judicial Review
- Legal Profession Conduct