Loganathan Ravishankar v ACIES Law Corp: Taxation of Solicitor's Bill of Costs

In Loganathan Ravishankar v ACIES Law Corp, the High Court of Singapore addressed the plaintiff's application to tax three invoices issued by the defendant law firm for legal services rendered. The court, presided over by Justice Choo Han Teck, allowed the taxation of the first two invoices, finding special circumstances due to insufficient itemization, but dismissed the application for the third invoice, citing a valid settlement agreement between the parties. The plaintiff sought taxation under the Legal Profession Act 1966.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application to tax the first and second invoices allowed; application to tax the third invoice dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court allowed the taxation of the first two invoices but dismissed the application to tax the third invoice, concerning the taxation of a solicitor’s bill of costs.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Loganathan RavishankarPlaintiffIndividualApplication to tax the first and second invoices allowedPartial
ACIES Law CorporationDefendantCorporationApplication to tax the first and second invoices allowedPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lam Yiting JoelleAGP Law LLC
Arivanantham s/o KrishnanAGP Law LLC
Leong Wen Jia NicholasACIES Law Corporation
Devinder Kumar s/o Ram Sakal RaiACIES Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiff and MyJet Asia Pte Ltd were clients of the defendant law firm.
  2. The defendant issued three invoices to the plaintiff for work done in HC/S 731/2019.
  3. The first and second invoices were paid by MyJet, which is now under liquidation.
  4. The defendant sued the plaintiff in HC/S 670/2021 for payment of the third invoice but discontinued the suit after a settlement agreement.
  5. MyJet made partial payments on the third invoice by issuing five post-dated cheques.
  6. The plaintiff seeks to have all three invoices taxed.
  7. The Letter of Engagement stated that both the plaintiff and MyJet would be personally responsible for the payment of the defendant’s legal fees.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Loganathan Ravishankar v ACIES Law Corp, Originating Summons No 302 of 2022, [2022] SGHC 135

6. Timeline

DateEvent
First invoice issued
Second invoice issued
Third invoice issued
Notice of Continuance for S 670 filed
Judgment reserved
Judgment issued

7. Legal Issues

  1. Taxation of Solicitor's Bill of Costs
    • Outcome: The court allowed the taxation of the first two invoices but dismissed the application to tax the third invoice.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Special circumstances for taxation after 12 months
      • Locus standi to apply for taxation
      • Effect of settlement agreement on right to taxation
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 5 SLR 722
      • [1979–1980] SLR(R) 603
      • [1994] QCA 285
  2. Locus Standi
    • Outcome: The court held that the plaintiff had locus standi to apply for taxation under s 120 of the LPA in his personal capacity.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Settlement Agreement
    • Outcome: The court found that there was a valid and enforceable settlement agreement between the parties to compromise S 670, and therefore the plaintiff was not entitled to tax the 3rd Invoice.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [1994] QCA 285

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Taxation of Invoices

9. Cause of Actions

  • Taxation of Solicitor's Bill of Costs

10. Practice Areas

  • Taxation of Costs
  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd v ThangaveluHigh CourtYes[2015] 5 SLR 722SingaporeCited as an example of special circumstances where a bill of costs fails to provide sufficient information for the client to make an informed decision on taxation.
Wee Harry Lee v Haw Par Brothers International LtdCourt of AppealYes[1979–1980] SLR(R) 603SingaporeCited for the principle that the presentation of a final lump sum figure without attributing individual costs to each item amounts to special circumstances justifying taxation.
Connolly Suthers v Geoffrey Ellis FrostSupreme Court of QueenslandYes[1994] QCA 285AustraliaCited for the principle that once there is an effective and binding compromise between the parties, the claim is no longer on the invoice for legal fees but on the deed of compromise which was not susceptible to taxation.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act 1966Singapore
Legal Profession Act 1966 Section 120(1)Singapore
Legal Profession Act 1966 Section 122Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Taxation
  • Bill of costs
  • Locus standi
  • Special circumstances
  • Settlement agreement
  • Legal Profession Act
  • Invoices
  • Letter of Engagement

15.2 Keywords

  • Taxation of costs
  • Legal Profession Act
  • Settlement agreement
  • Locus standi
  • Special circumstances

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Legal Profession Act90
Assessment of Legal Costs85
Taxation of Legal Fees70
Solicitor's fees60
Judgments and Orders30
Contract Law20

16. Subjects

  • Legal Costs
  • Professional Responsibility