Tan Ng Kuang v Law Society: Disciplinary Proceedings & Professional Conduct

In Tan Ng Kuang and Lim Siew Soo v Law Society of Singapore, the High Court of Singapore considered an application by Tan Ng Kuang and Lim Siew Soo to direct the Law Society of Singapore to apply for the appointment of Disciplinary Tribunals to investigate alleged misconduct by Mr. Lee Teck Leng Robson and Mr. Jai Swarup Pathak of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP. The applicants contended that the solicitors failed to properly handle funds deposited for their fees as judicial managers. The court granted the application, directing the Law Society to apply for the appointment of Disciplinary Tribunals to investigate the matter.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application granted; Law Society directed to apply for appointment of Disciplinary Tribunals.

1.3 Case Type

Regulatory

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court directed the Law Society of Singapore to appoint Disciplinary Tribunals to investigate alleged misconduct by solicitors regarding handling of client funds.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Law Society of SingaporeRespondentStatutory BoardApplication GrantedLost
Tan Ng KuangApplicantIndividualApplication GrantedWon
Lim Siew SooApplicantIndividualApplication GrantedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Valerie TheanJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Siraj OmarDrew & Napier LLC
Teng Po YewDrew & Napier LLC
Chew XiangRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Tan Chuan ThyeRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
James KwongRajah & Tann Singapore LLP

4. Facts

  1. Applicants were appointed as judicial managers of PLPL and SEC.
  2. Applicants alleged an oral agreement with PLL for a S$2 million deposit.
  3. Solicitors confirmed receipt of S$500,000 but later denied holding funds for JMs’ fees.
  4. Applicants filed affidavits asserting the agreement.
  5. Solicitors maintained funds were client monies and followed client instructions.
  6. Inquiry Committees accepted the Solicitors’ version of events.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Tan Ng Kuang and another v Law Society of Singapore, Originating Summons No 263 of 2020, [2020] SGHC 127

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Applicants provided consents to act as judicial managers
Email set out deposit of S$2 million
Email acknowledged possibility of modifying how deposit was to be paid
Applicants appointed as judicial managers for PLPL and SEC
Ms. Lim asked solicitors whether deposit had been provided
Mr. Pathak indicated Mr. Punj will render authorization for JM fee deposit
Mr. Pathak confirmed S$500,000 will be placed with Gibson Dunn towards payment of JM fees
Mr. Pathak described S$2 million as a trust deposit
Ms. Lim replied pointing out unsatisfactory elements of email
Ms. Lim sent a chaser seeking confirmation of receipt of S$250,000
Mr. Pathak confirmed receipt of funds placed in trust fund for JM fees
Mr. Lee stated that they were not holding onto any funds for the JMs’ fees
Affidavits filed by Ms Lim in judicial management proceedings
Affidavits filed by Ms Lim in judicial management proceedings
Affidavits filed by Ms Lim in judicial management proceedings
Applicants made complaints to the Law Society about the Solicitors
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Professional Misconduct
    • Outcome: The court directed the Law Society to apply for the appointment of Disciplinary Tribunals to investigate the alleged misconduct.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to properly handle client funds
      • Breach of ethical obligations

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Order directing Law Society to apply for appointment of Disciplinary Tribunals

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of ethical obligations
  • Failure to properly handle client funds

10. Practice Areas

  • Regulatory Law
  • Professional Responsibility

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Loh Der Ming Andrew v Law Society of SingaporeHigh CourtYes[2018] 3 SLR 837SingaporeCited for the role of the Inquiry Committee in the Legal Profession Act.
Subbiah Pillai v Wong Meng Meng and othersCourt of AppealYes[2001] 2 SLR(R) 556SingaporeCited for the role of the Inquiry Committee in the Legal Profession Act.
Re Nalpon Zero Geraldo MarioHigh CourtYes[2012] 3 SLR 440SingaporeCited for the standard of evidence required to establish an ethical breach.
Haw Tua Tau and others v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[1981-1982] SLR(R) 133SingaporeCited for the standard of evidence required to establish an ethical breach.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Disciplinary Tribunals
  • Judicial Managers
  • Law Society
  • Professional Misconduct
  • Escrow
  • Trust Deposit
  • Inquiry Committee

15.2 Keywords

  • Disciplinary Proceedings
  • Legal Profession
  • Professional Conduct
  • Law Society
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Legal Profession Act95
Disciplinary Proceedings90
Professional Ethics85
Professional Conduct Rules80
Ethical impropriety75
Fiduciary Duties60
Contract Law50
Company Law30

16. Subjects

  • Legal Ethics
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Regulatory Law