Rahaman Mohammad Moshiur v Subbiah Pillai: Taxation of Legal Costs

In Rahaman Mohammad Moshiur v Subbiah Pillai, the High Court of Singapore addressed an application by the plaintiff, Rahaman Mohammad Moshiur, for the taxation of the defendant, Subbiah Pillai's bill of costs. The plaintiff engaged the defendant for a claim against Peng Tat Construction Pte Ltd, which was settled. The court, presided over by Chua Lee Ming J, granted the application, finding special circumstances that justified the taxation despite the delay. The court ordered the defendant to pay costs to the plaintiff fixed at $7,000.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Application granted; defendant's bill to be taxed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court ordered the taxation of the defendant's bill of costs due to special circumstances, including insufficient information and breach of conduct rules.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Rahaman Mohammad MoshiurPlaintiffIndividualApplication grantedWonYow Choon Seng
Subbiah Pillai t/a Tan & PillaiDefendantIndividualBill to be taxedLostSubbiah Pillai

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chua Lee MingJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Yow Choon SengInfinity Legal LLC
Subbiah PillaiTan & Pillai

4. Facts

  1. Plaintiff engaged defendant to claim damages for personal injuries.
  2. Plaintiff's claim was settled for $200,000 plus costs and disbursements.
  3. Judgment was entered for $225,000 plus costs and disbursements.
  4. PTCPL's insurers paid $251,538.70 to the defendant.
  5. Defendant extended interest-free loans to the plaintiff.
  6. Plaintiff discharged the defendant due to non-payment of Judgment Sum.
  7. Defendant produced an invoice for $100,000.
  8. Plaintiff made a police report and lodged a complaint with the Law Society.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Rahaman Mohammad Moshiur v Subbiah Pillai (trading as Tan & Pillai), Originating Summons No 1289 of 2021, [2022] SGHC 156

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Plaintiff suffered personal injuries at worksite.
Plaintiff engaged defendant to act for him.
Plaintiff returned to Bangladesh.
Defendant extended interest-free loans to the plaintiff.
Proceedings commenced in the High Court.
Action transferred to the State Courts.
Plaintiff accepted offer to settle.
Judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff.
Invoice prepared by defendant.
PTCPL's insurers paid the defendant the Judgment Sum.
Plaintiff returned to Singapore.
Plaintiff met with the defendant to inquire about compensation.
Plaintiff discharged the defendant from further acting for him.
Plaintiff met with the defendant and demanded payment.
Plaintiff made a police report.
Plaintiff lodged a complaint with the Law Society.
Plaintiff met with the defendant after Nazrul asked him to do so.
Plaintiff met with Nazrul who handed him $78,000 in cash.
Plaintiff met with a representative from TWC2.
Plaintiff returned to Bangladesh.
PTCPL's insurers informed Debbie about the Judgment Sum payment.
Plaintiff's lawyers conducted a cause book search.
Infinity Legal wrote to the defendant.
Plaintiff filed the present application.
Hearing of the application.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Taxation of Solicitor's Bill of Costs
    • Outcome: The court granted the plaintiff's application for taxation of the defendant's bill of costs.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Special circumstances for taxation after 12 months
      • Sufficiency of information in bill of costs
      • Breach of Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Taxation of Bill of Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Professional Conduct

10. Practice Areas

  • Taxation of Costs
  • Professional Conduct

11. Industries

  • Legal Services

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Wee Harry Lee v Haw Par Brothers International LtdCourt of AppealYes[1979-1980] SLR(R) 603SingaporeCited for the principle that there is no rigid rule as to what constitutes special circumstances for taxation of a solicitor's bill.
Re CheesemanN/AYes[1891] 2 Ch 289N/ACited for the principle that what amounts to special circumstances depends on the facts of each case.
Sports Connection Pte Ltd v Asia Corp and anotherHigh CourtYes[2010] 4 SLR 590SingaporeCited for the principle that it would not be expedient to provide an exhaustive list of what could constitute special circumstances under s 122 of the LPA.
Kosui Singapore Pte Ltd v ThangaveluCourt of AppealYes[2015] 5 SLR 722SingaporeCited for the principle that special circumstances must address why it is right to refer the solicitor’s bill for taxation even though the client has allowed one or both of the disqualifying events under s 122 to be triggered.
Tan Yi Ling Cheryl v Tan Yew Fai (trading as Y F Tan & Co)High CourtYes[2022] SGHC 47SingaporeCited for the principle that a breach of obligations under PCR r 17(5) is a relevant factor in finding special circumstances.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore
Work Injury Compensation Act (Cap 354, 2009 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Taxation
  • Bill of costs
  • Special circumstances
  • Judgment Sum
  • Lien
  • Professional costs
  • Disbursements
  • Legal Profession Act
  • Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules

15.2 Keywords

  • taxation
  • costs
  • legal
  • solicitor
  • singapore

16. Subjects

  • Legal Costs
  • Professional Negligence

17. Areas of Law

  • Legal Profession
  • Civil Procedure
  • Costs
  • Taxation