Law Society v Chia Chwee Imm Helen: Disciplinary Procedures for Non-Practicing Solicitors

The Law Society of Singapore applied for leave to investigate a misconduct complaint against Chia Chwee Imm Helen, a non-practicing solicitor, concerning her conduct while she did not have a valid practicing certificate. The Chief Justice of the High Court of Singapore allowed the application, finding a prima facie case for investigation and that the Law Society had standing to bring the application.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Regulatory

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Application for leave to investigate misconduct complaint against non-practicing solicitor, Chia Chwee Imm Helen. The court allowed the application.

1.7 Decision Date

13 June 2021

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
The Law Society of Singapore	Applicant	Statutory Board	Application Allowed	Won	Lim Jie Hao Sampson of Allen & Gledhill LLP Chia Su Min Rebecca of Allen & Gledhill LLP Peh Aik Hin of Allen & Gledhill LLP
Chia Chwee Imm Helen Mrs Helen Thomas	Respondent	Individual	Application Allowed	Lost	Yuen Ai Zhen Carol of Peter Low & Choo LLC Peter Cuthbert Low of Peter Low & Choo LLC

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Sundaresh Menon	Chief Justice	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Lim Jie Hao Sampson	Allen & Gledhill LLP
Chia Su Min Rebecca	Allen & Gledhill LLP
Peh Aik Hin	Allen & Gledhill LLP
Yuen Ai Zhen Carol	Peter Low & Choo LLC
Peter Cuthbert Low	Peter Low & Choo LLC

4. Facts

Respondent did not have a practicing certificate between 17 December 2016 and 30 May 2018.
Client engaged the Respondent in December 2016 to advise and represent her in matrimonial proceedings.
In November 2017, the Client applied to the Family Justice Courts for the care and custody of her child.
On 18 December 2017, the Respondent informed the Client that she was an undischarged bankrupt.
The Client lent the Respondent $40,000 to discharge her bankruptcy.
The Client's mother lent the Respondent $20,000.
The Respondent gave the impression that she had discharged her bankruptcy and would be appearing at the hearing.

5. Formal Citations

Law Society of Singapore v Chia Chwee Imm Helen Mrs Helen Thomas, Originating Summons No 1163 of 2020, [2021] SGHC 140

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2016-12-17	Respondent did not have a practicing certificate
2016-12-01	Client engaged the Respondent to advise and represent her in matrimonial proceedings
2017-11-01	Client applied to the Family Justice Courts for the care and custody of her child
2017-12-18	Respondent informed the Client that she was an undischarged bankrupt
2017-12-28	Mediation was scheduled to take place
2018-03-20	New firm filed a Notice of Change of Solicitors
2018-04-01	Hearing of the Client’s care and custody application took place
2018-05-30	Respondent’s bankruptcy was discharged
2018-09-01	Client discharged the Respondent as her solicitor
2019-08-01	Client succeeded in her appeal in the care and custody proceedings
2019-09-01	Client lodged a complaint with the Law Society
2019-12-01	Inquiry Committee was constituted
2020-03-01	Hearing before the Inquiry Committee took place
2020-05-01	Inquiry Committee issued its report
2020-11-01	Law Society made the Present Application
2021-04-21	Present Application was heard
2021-06-14	Grounds of Decision issued

7. Legal Issues

Standing to Bring Application
- Outcome: The court held that both the Law Society and the putative client had standing to bring the application.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [2015] 3 SLR 1187
  - [2020] 5 SLR 1080
  - [2016] 4 SLR 192
Leave to Investigate Misconduct
- Outcome: The court granted leave for a Disciplinary Tribunal to be empanelled to investigate the Client’s complaint.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2019] 5 SLR 1037
Breach of Section 33 of the Legal Profession Act
- Outcome: The court found a prima facie case that the Respondent falsely pretended to be authorised to act as an advocate and solicitor.
- Category: Substantive
Misconduct under s 83(2)(h) of the Legal Profession Act
- Outcome: The court found a prima facie case that the Respondent's conduct rendered her unfit to remain as a member of an honourable profession.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2006] 4 SLR(R) 308
  - [1999] 3 SLR(R) 966

8. Remedies Sought

Leave to investigate a complaint of misconduct
Appointment of a Disciplinary Tribunal

9. Cause of Actions

No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

Regulatory Law
Professional Conduct

11. Industries

Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy	High Court	Yes	[2015] 3 SLR 1187	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the Respondent can address the court on the Law Society’s standing to prosecute the Client’s complaint.
Re Parti Liyani	High Court	Yes	[2020] 5 SLR 1080	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the Respondent can address the court on the Law Society’s standing to prosecute the Client’s complaint.
Law Society of Singapore v Mahadevan Lukshumayeh and others	High Court	Yes	[2008] 4 SLR(R) 116	Singapore	Cited as a precedent where the Law Society applied under s 82A of the LPA for leave to convene a DT to investigate a non-practicing solicitor’s alleged misconduct.
Law Society of Singapore v Gopalan Nair (alias Pallichadath Gopalan Nair)	High Court	Yes	[2011] 4 SLR 607	Singapore	Cited as a precedent where the Law Society applied under s 82A of the LPA for leave to convene a DT to investigate a non-practicing solicitor’s alleged misconduct.
Deepak Sharma v Law Society of Singapore	High Court	Yes	[2016] 4 SLR 192	Singapore	Cited for the underlying purpose of disciplinary proceedings under the LPA.
Re Fordham, Michael QC	High Court	Yes	[2015] 1 SLR 272	Singapore	Cited regarding the concern about busybodies making frivolous complaints.
Re Salwant Singh s/o Amer Singh	High Court	Yes	[2019] 5 SLR 1037	Singapore	Cited for the two-step framework for granting leave for a DT to be empanelled.
Re Nalpon Zero Geraldo Mario	High Court	Yes	[2012] 3 SLR 440	Singapore	Cited for the definition of a prima facie case for an investigation into a complaint of misconduct against a non-practicing solicitor.
Law Society of Singapore v Ahmad Khalis bin Abdul Ghani	High Court	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR(R) 308	Singapore	Cited for the interpretation of s 83(2)(h) of the LPA.
In re Weare, a Solicitor; In re the Solicitors Act, 1888	Queen's Bench Division	Yes	[1893] 2 QB 439	England and Wales	Cited for the interpretation of s 83(2)(h) of the LPA.
Law Society of Singapore v Heng Guan Hong Geoffrey	High Court	Yes	[1999] 3 SLR(R) 966	Singapore	Cited for the interpretation of s 83(2)(h) of the LPA.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Legal Profession (Disciplinary Tribunal) Rules (Cap 161, R 2, 2010 Rev Ed)

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 82A of the Legal Profession Act	Singapore
s 33 of the Legal Profession Act	Singapore
s 83(2)(h) of the Legal Profession Act	Singapore
s 85 of the Legal Profession Act	Singapore
s 38(1) of the Legal Profession Act	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Non-practicing solicitor
Disciplinary Tribunal
Legal Profession Act
Inquiry Committee
Practicing certificate
Misconduct
Standing
Prima facie case

15.2 Keywords

Legal Profession
Disciplinary Proceedings
Non-Practicing Solicitor
Law Society
Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Disciplinary Proceedings	95
Legal Profession Act	90
Professional Misconduct	80

16. Subjects

Legal Ethics
Professional Responsibility
Regulatory Law