Attorney-General v Ong Wui Teck: Contempt of Court for Scandalising the Court
In Attorney-General v Ong Wui Teck, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by the Attorney-General for an order of committal against Ong Wui Teck for contempt of court. The contempt charges stemmed from allegations made by Ong against Justice Woo Bih Li and the Supreme Court in affidavits filed in a recusal application. The High Court found Ong Wui Teck guilty of scandalising contempt and contempt in the face of the court.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Guilty of scandalising contempt and contempt in the face of the court.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Ong Wui Teck faced contempt charges for scandalising the court with allegations against Justice Woo Bih Li. The High Court found Ong guilty of contempt.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Attorney-General | Applicant | Government Agency | Judgment for Applicant | Won | Khoo Boo Jin of Attorney-General’s Chambers Elaine Liew of Attorney-General’s Chambers May Ng of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ong Wui Teck | Respondent | Individual | Guilty of scandalising contempt and contempt in the face of the court | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Khoo Boo Jin | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Elaine Liew | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| May Ng | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Ong Wui Teck filed affidavits containing allegations against Justice Woo Bih Li.
- The Attorney-General applied for an order of committal against Ong Wui Teck for contempt of court.
- The allegations were made in the context of a recusal application.
- The allegations included claims of bias, impropriety, and obstruction of justice.
- The High Court found Ong Wui Teck guilty of scandalising contempt and contempt in the face of the court.
- The court determined that the allegations went beyond fair criticism and posed a real risk to public confidence in the administration of justice.
5. Formal Citations
- Attorney-General v Ong Wui Teck, Originating Summons No 871 of 2017(Summons No 3979 of 2017), [2019] SGHC 30
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Ong Wui Teck filed recusal application | |
| Leave granted to apply for order of committal | |
| Hearing began | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Scandalising Contempt
- Outcome: The court found that the allegations made by Mr. Ong posed a real risk of undermining public confidence in the administration of justice.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2011] 3 SLR 778
- [2016] 1 SLR 992
- Contempt in the Face of the Court
- Outcome: The court found that Mr. Ong's conduct constituted contempt in the face of the court due to wilful insults to the judge.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2007] 4 SLR(R) 17
- Fair Criticism
- Outcome: The court found that the allegations made by Mr. Ong did not constitute fair criticism.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2011] 3 SLR 778
8. Remedies Sought
- Order of Committal
9. Cause of Actions
- Contempt of Court
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ong Wui Swoon v Ong Wui Teck | High Court | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 733 | Singapore | Cited for disputes between Mr. Ong and his sister in relation to their father’s estate. |
| Ong Wui Swoon v Ong Wui Teck and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2014] SGHC 157 | Singapore | Cited for Woo J's decision on Registrar's Appeals Nos 54 and 72 of 2014. |
| Ong Wui Teck v Ong Wui Swoon | High Court | Yes | [2016] 2 SLR 1067 | Singapore | Cited for Woo J's grounds of decision to recuse himself from hearing actions related to the mother's estate. |
| Shadrake Alan v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 778 | Singapore | Cited for the principles of scandalising contempt of court. |
| Au Wai Pang v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 992 | Singapore | Cited for reaffirming the principles of scandalising contempt of court. |
| Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd v Karaha Bodas Co LLC | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 518 | Singapore | Cited for the purpose of contempt of court is to ensure public confidence in the administration of justice. |
| Attorney-General v Tan Liang Joo John | High Court | Yes | [2009] 2 SLR(R) 1132 | Singapore | Cited for factors to determine whether a statement is fair criticism made in good faith. |
| BOI v BOJ | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 1156 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an applicant in a recusal application would allege actual or apparent bias on the part of the judge. |
| R v Collins | Supreme Court of Victoria | Yes | [1954] VLR 46 | Australia | Cited for the principle that violent abuse and unsubstantiated allegations of dishonesty cannot be relevant to recusal applications. |
| Re Wiseman | Court of Appeal of Wellington | Yes | [1969] NZLR 55 | New Zealand | Cited for the principle that allegations in affidavits can constitute contempt of court. |
| Secretary for Justice v Choy Bing Wing | Court of First Instance | Yes | [2005] HKEC 1971 | Hong Kong | Cited for the principle that allegations of dishonesty of a judge in an affidavit can constitute contempt. |
| McGuirk v University of New South Wales | Supreme Court of New South Wales | Yes | [2009] NSWSC 1058 | Australia | Cited for the principle that placing an affidavit containing contemptuous allegations before the court may satisfy the technical requirement for publication. |
| Tan Chi Min v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc | High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 529 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of open justice and public inspection of court documents. |
| You Xin v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 17 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of contempt in the face of the court. |
| Tang Liang Hong v Lee Kuan Yew and another and other appeals | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR(R) 576 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that any error of law or of fact cannot be translated into an appearance of bias on the part of the judge. |
| Koperasi Serbaguna Taiping Barat Bhd v Lim Joo Thong | High Court | Yes | [1999] 6 MLJ 38 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that contempt in the face of the court may arise from any act, slander, contemptuous utterance, or disobedience to a court order. |
| Joseph Orakwue Izuora v The Queen | Privy Council | Yes | [1953] AC 327 | United Kingdom | Cited for the principle that it is not possible to particularise the acts which can or cannot constitute contempt in the face of the court. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 52 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| Order 60 r 4 of the Rules of Court |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Contempt of court
- Scandalising contempt
- Recusal application
- Bias
- Judicial impartiality
- Public confidence
- Administration of justice
- Fair criticism
15.2 Keywords
- Contempt
- Scandalising
- Court
- Ong Wui Teck
- Attorney-General
- Singapore
- Justice Woo Bih Li
- Recusal
- Bias
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Contempt of Court | 95 |
| Scandalising the court | 90 |
| Contempt in the face of the court | 90 |
| Civil Procedure | 30 |
| Administrative Law | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Contempt of Court
- Legal Ethics
- Judicial Review