Lau Wan Heng v Public Prosecutor: Market Rigging & Securities Act Offences
Lau Wan Heng appealed to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore against her sentence in the District Court for one charge under s 197(1A)(a) of the Securities and Futures Act (SFA) for market rigging and 12 charges under s 201(b) SFA for deceptive practices. Lau Wan Heng had assisted a scheme to manipulate the price of Koyo International Ltd shares. See Kee Oon J dismissed the appeal, finding the original sentence was not manifestly excessive.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Lau Wan Heng appeals against her sentence for market rigging and deceptive practices under the Securities and Futures Act. The High Court dismissed the appeal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lau Wan Heng | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Abraham Vergis SC, Loo Yinglin Bestlyn |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Suhas Malhotra, Tan Zhi Hao, Phoebe Leau, Pearly Ang |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| See Kee Oon | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Abraham Vergis SC | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Loo Yinglin Bestlyn | Providence Law Asia LLC |
| Suhas Malhotra | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Zhi Hao | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Phoebe Leau | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Pearly Ang | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Lau Wan Heng pleaded guilty to market rigging and deceptive practice offences.
- Lau Wan Heng assisted a scheme to manipulate the price of Koyo shares.
- Lau Wan Heng procured 31 trading accounts for the scheme.
- The scheme employed 53 trading accounts opened in the names of 15 individuals.
- The scheme manipulated the share price of Koyo for about 18 months.
- Koyo’s share price crashed by almost 84% after SGX issued a “trade with caution” warning.
- A total of $3,119,034.93 in contra trading losses was incurred in the 31 accounts procured by the appellant.
5. Formal Citations
- Lau Wan Heng v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9849 of 2020/02, [2021] SGHC 240
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Koyo International Ltd shares listed on the Catalist board of the Singapore Exchange | |
| Lin Eng Jue led a scheme to manipulate the price of Koyo shares | |
| Lau Wan Heng joined the scheme to manipulate the price of Koyo shares | |
| Andrew stopped paying for contra losses | |
| Singapore Exchange issued a “trade with caution” warning | |
| Koyo’s share price crashed | |
| Amended Statement of Facts was issued | |
| District Judge's grounds of decision published | |
| Lau Wan Heng commenced serving her sentence | |
| Judgment reserved | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Manifest Excessiveness of Sentence for Market Rigging Offence
- Outcome: The court held that the sentence of 20 months' imprisonment for the Market Rigging Offence was not manifestly excessive.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether Custodial Threshold Crossed for Deceptive Practice Offences
- Outcome: The court held that the custodial threshold had been crossed for the Proceeded Deceptive Practice Offences.
- Category: Substantive
- Consecutive Imprisonment Terms for Deceptive Practice Offences
- Outcome: The court held that the imprisonment terms of three Proceeded Deceptive Practice Offences should be ordered to run consecutively.
- Category: Procedural
- Totality Principle in Sentencing
- Outcome: The court held that the aggregate sentence was in keeping with the totality principle.
- Category: Procedural
- Sentencing Framework for s 197 SFA Offences
- Outcome: The court declined to lay down a sentencing framework for s 197 SFA offences in the present case.
- Category: Procedural
- Sentencing Parity
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant deserves a much heavier sentence than her three co-accused, Yeo, Steven and Rayson.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Market Rigging
- Deceptive Practices
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Securities Law
- White Collar Crime
- Appellate Practice
11. Industries
- Finance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Lau Wan Heng | District Court | Yes | [2020] SGDC 293 | Singapore | Cited as the grounds of decision of the lower court. |
| Public Prosecutor v Prem Hirubalan | High Court | Yes | [2016] SGHC 156 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for sentencing on a s 201(b) SFA charge. |
| Ng Geok Eng v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 913 | Singapore | Cited for guidance on sentencing under the SFA and the need for deterrent sentences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ng Sae Kiat and other appeals | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 167 | Singapore | Cited for setting out sentencing factors in respect of s 201(b) SFA offences. |
| Soh Guan Cheow Anthony v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 3 SLR 147 | Singapore | Cited as a case where custodial sentences were imposed after Ng Sae Kiat. |
| Logachev Vladislav v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 609 | Singapore | Cited for factors relevant to determining an offender’s culpability. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wong Chee Meng and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 5 SLR 807 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework for offences under s 6 read with s 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. |
| Public Prosecutor v Raveen Balakrishnan | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 799 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of avoiding double-counting aggravating factors. |
| Edwin s/o Suse Nathen v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 1139 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the mere absence of an aggravating factor is neutral and not mitigating. |
| Ng Soon Kim v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2020] 3 SLR 1097 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a sentencing framework should not be prescribed without sufficient sentencing jurisprudence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ramlee and another action | High Court | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 95 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of sentencing parity. |
| Than Stenly Granida Purwanto v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2003] 3 SLR(R) 576 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an offender who takes on a pivotal role in the scheme may be highly culpable, even if he or she is not the mastermind of the scheme. |
| Mohamed Shouffee bin Adam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 998 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the one-transaction rule is an evaluative rule directed towards the enquiry as to whether an offender should be doubly punished for offences that have been committed simultaneously or close together in time. |
| ADF v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 874 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the multiplicity of offences should have primary relevance at the second stage of determining whether the global sentence should be enhanced by consecutive sentencing. |
| Navaseelan Balasingam v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2007] 1 SLR(R) 767 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the effect of having admitted to outstanding charges would be that the accused had committed many more similar offences and that fact must aggravate the charges proceeded with. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chan Chwee Leong | District Court | Yes | [2006] SGDC 249 | Singapore | Cited by the appellant to argue that the sentence for the Market Rigging Offence appears to be disproportionately higher than the sentence meted out in Chan Chwee Leong. |
| Public Prosecutor v Soligny Bruno Ludovic | District Court | Yes | [2019] SGDC 20 | Singapore | Cited as a case where custodial sentences were imposed after Ng Sae Kiat. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Securities and Futures Act (Cap 289, 2006 Rev Ed) s 197(1A)(a) | Singapore |
| Securities and Futures Act s 201(b) | Singapore |
| Securities Industry Act (Cap 289, 1985 Rev Ed) s 97 | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 324 | Singapore |
| Casino Control Act (Cap 33A, 2007 Rev Ed) s 172A(2) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Market rigging
- Securities and Futures Act
- Deceptive practices
- Contra trading
- Share manipulation
- Trading accounts
- SGX
- Catalist board
- Sentencing
- Sentencing framework
- Sentencing parity
- Totality principle
- Custodial sentence
15.2 Keywords
- Market rigging
- Securities and Futures Act
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
- Appeal
- Sentencing
16. Subjects
- Securities Law
- Criminal Law
- Financial Regulation
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Statutory Offences
- Securities and Futures Act
- Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
- Sentencing
- Appeals
- Market Rigging
- Securities Regulation