Rahman Mohammad Jillour v Paretam Singh: Account of Settlement Moneys & Solicitor's Bill of Costs
Rahman Mohammad Jillour filed an originating summons in the High Court of Singapore against his former solicitor, Paretam Singh s/o Kishen Singh, seeking a statement of accounts regarding settlement moneys. The plaintiff alleged discrepancies in the solicitor's bill of costs and an outstanding payment. The court, presided over by Aedit Abdullah J, refused the application, stating that the defendant had already provided his version of the events and that the plaintiff's remedy lay in either taxation of costs or a separate cause of action based on his version of the facts. The court also noted that any potential misconduct should be addressed through a formal complaint within the appropriate legislative framework.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application refused.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Plaintiff sought a statement of accounts from his former solicitor. The court declined the application, stating the remedy lay through other mechanisms.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rahman Mohammad Jillour | Plaintiff | Individual | Application refused | Lost | |
| Paretam Singh s/o Kishen Singh@ Pritam Singh Gill | Defendant | Individual | Application refused | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Plaintiff suffered serious injuries in a worksite accident in September 2015.
- Plaintiff instructed the defendant to claim damages in October 2015.
- A settlement of S$204,674 was reached with the insurers in 2017.
- The plaintiff disputed the use of the settlement sum.
- The defendant claimed S$68,674 for costs, disbursements, and advances.
- The plaintiff alleged he was promised S$170,000, with S$70,000 outstanding.
- The plaintiff sought a statement of accounts, payment of the balance sum, and equitable remedies.
5. Formal Citations
- Rahman Mohammad Jillour v Paretam Singh s/o Kishen Singh (alias Pritam Singh Gill), Originating Summons No 295 of 2020, [2021] SGHC 30
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Plaintiff suffered injuries in a worksite accident. | |
| Plaintiff instructed the defendant to claim damages. | |
| Settlement reached with insurers for S$204,674. | |
| Plaintiff came to Singapore to collect settlement money. | |
| Plaintiff returned to Singapore to inquire about the remaining S$70,000. | |
| Plaintiff sought documentary evidence from the defendant. | |
| Plaintiff commenced proceedings seeking a statement of accounts. | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Judgment date. |
7. Legal Issues
- Entitlement to a Statement of Accounts
- Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to a statement of accounts in this instance.
- Category: Procedural
- Solicitor's Duty to Account
- Outcome: The court found that the defendant had already provided sufficient information, fulfilling his duty to account.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Statement of Accounts
- Payment of Balance Sum
- Equitable Remedies
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Contract
- Failure to Account
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Norman Allen v Brethertons LLP | High Court of Justice | Yes | [2018] EWHC B15 (Costs) | United Kingdom | Cited to show that ordering an account is a matter of discretion which the court will not exercise if information had already been provided. |
| Jonathan Whale v Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd | High Court of Justice | Yes | [2018] EWHC B10 (Costs) | United Kingdom | Cited to show that ordering an account is a matter of discretion which the court will not exercise if information had already been provided. |
| Lalwani Shalini Gobind and another v Lalwani Ashok Bherumal | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 90 | Singapore | Cited to differentiate between the giving of accounts by a trustee and the accounting of profits owed by a fiduciary. |
| Libertarian Investments Ltd v Thomas Alexej Hall | N/A | Yes | [2014] 1 HKC 368 | Hong Kong | Cited to differentiate between the giving of accounts by a trustee and the accounting of profits owed by a fiduciary. |
| Foo Jee Boo and another v Foo Jhee Tuang and others | High Court | Yes | [2016] SGHC 260 | Singapore | Cited to draw a parallel with the rendering of an account by trustees, whereby an account will be refused if it amounts to oppression. |
| Lakshmi Prataprai Bhojwani (alias Mrs Lakshmi Jethanand Bhojwani) v Moti Harkishindas Bhojwani | N/A | Yes | [2019] 3 SLR 356 | Singapore | Cited to draw a parallel with the rendering of an account by trustees, whereby an account will be refused if it amounts to oppression. |
| Wingate v Butterfield Trust (Bermuda) Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2008] WTLR 357 | Bermuda | Cited to show that an order for the taking of accounts against a defaulting trustee can be declined if the court concludes that disclosure is a more appropriate and sufficient remedy. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015 (S 706/2015) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Settlement Sum
- Statement of Accounts
- Legal Costs
- Disbursements
- Solicitor-Client Relationship
- Taxation of Costs
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession
- Bill of Costs
- Account
- Settlement Moneys
- Solicitor
- Client
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Duty to Account | 80 |
| Legal Profession Act | 75 |
| Assessment of Legal Costs | 60 |
| Accounting and Inquiry | 50 |
| Civil Procedure | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Profession
- Account
- Bill of Costs