Parti Liyani v Public Prosecutor: Application for Leave to Commence Disciplinary Proceedings Against DPPs
In OS 559/2020, Parti Liyani applied to the High Court of Singapore for leave to commence disciplinary proceedings against DPP Tan Yanying and DPP Tan Wee Hao, who prosecuted her in a theft trial. The application arises from the DPPs' conduct regarding evidence about a DVD player's functionality. The High Court, led by Sundaresh Menon CJ, granted leave for an investigation into the complaint, finding a prima facie case of potential misconduct.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the republic of singapore1.2 Outcome
Application Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Parti Liyani seeks leave to commence disciplinary proceedings against DPPs for alleged misconduct during her theft trial. The court grants leave for investigation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parti Liyani | Applicant | Individual | Application Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Anil Narain Balchandani | Red Lion Circle |
4. Facts
- Parti Liyani, a foreign worker, was employed as a domestic helper by Mr. Liew Mun Leong.
- Mr. Liew filed a police report against Parti Liyani, alleging theft of numerous items.
- The DPPs conducted a demonstration of the Device, but did not disclose difficulties playing a DVD earlier that day.
- The applicant agreed that the Device had been working during the demonstration.
- Mr. Balchandani demonstrated that the Device had two modes and the DPPs had used the HDD mode.
- The Judge considered that the Device could fairly be described as spoilt in so far as the DVD function appeared to be faulty.
5. Formal Citations
- Re Parti Liyani, Originating Summons No 559 of 2020, [2020] SGHC 227
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Mr. Liew filed a police report against Parti Liyani, alleging theft. | |
| Mr. Liew testified that he did not think the Device was in working condition. | |
| Mdm Ng testified that the Device was functional and the applicant had never sought permission to take it. | |
| Mdm Ng testified that the Device was functional and the applicant had never sought permission to take it. | |
| The applicant testified that Mdm Ng had told her that the Device was damaged and intended to throw it away. | |
| The DPPs conducted a demonstration of the Device in court. | |
| Mr. Balchandani inspected the Device and informed the court that it was not functional. | |
| Mr. Balchandani highlighted that the DPPs had used certain equipment which was not part of the courtroom. | |
| Mr. Balchandani conducted a live demonstration of the Device during the continued re-examination of the applicant. | |
| The applicant filed OS 559. | |
| The Judge’s decision in Parti Liyani (HC) was issued. | |
| A pre-trial conference was convened. | |
| The applicant filed a Notice of Discontinuance/Withdrawal of OS 559. | |
| Hearing before the Chief Justice; applicant reconsidering discontinuance. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Misconduct of Deputy Public Prosecutors
- Outcome: The court found a prima facie case of misconduct and granted leave for an investigation.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Lack of candour
- Misleading the court
- Unfair cross-examination
8. Remedies Sought
- Leave to commence disciplinary proceedings
9. Cause of Actions
- Professional Misconduct
10. Practice Areas
- Regulatory Law
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Parti Liyani | District Court | Yes | [2019] SGDC 57 | Singapore | Sets out the initial conviction of the applicant on theft-related charges. |
| Parti Liyani v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 187 | Singapore | Sets out the appeal decision where the applicant's convictions were found unsafe and she was acquitted. |
| Re Salwant Singh s/o Amer Singh | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 1037 | Singapore | Cited for the two-stage process for granting leave for an investigation under s 82A(6) of the LPA. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 1187 | Singapore | Cited for the principles to be applied when considering whether to grant leave for an investigation into alleged misconduct. |
| Re Nalpon Zero Geraldo Mario | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 440 | Singapore | Cited for the principles to be applied when considering whether to grant leave for an investigation into alleged misconduct. |
| Rondel v Worsley | House of Lords | Yes | [1969] 1 AC 191 | England and Wales | Cited for the duty of counsel to the court. |
| Teo Wai Cheong v Crédit Industriel et Commercial and another appeal | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 3 SLR 573 | Singapore | Cited for the importance of cross-examination in eliciting the truth. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wee Teong Boo and other appeal and another matter | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 533 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of the Prosecution to assist in the administration of justice. |
| Muhammad Nabill bin Mohd Fuad v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 984 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of the Prosecution to act in the public interest. |
| Muhammad bin Kadar and another v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 1205 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of the Prosecution to disclose all relevant material. |
| Beh Chew Boo v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 98 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of the Prosecution to call a hostile witness where relevant to establishing the truth. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 82A(5) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 381 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Disciplinary proceedings
- Deputy Public Prosecutors
- Leave application
- Misconduct
- Functionality of Device
- Lack of candour
- Misleading the court
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession
- Disciplinary Proceedings
- Deputy Public Prosecutors
- Parti Liyani
- Misconduct
- Singapore High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Disciplinary Proceedings | 90 |
| Legal Profession Act | 85 |
| Prosecutorial Misconduct | 80 |
| Professional conduct | 75 |
| Evidence Law | 60 |
| Criminal Law | 30 |
| Civil Procedure | 20 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Criminal Justice
- Professional Responsibility