Tay Jie Qi & Low Shauna: Admission to the Bar - Disclosures of Past Misconduct
The High Court of Singapore heard applications by Tay Jie Qi (AAS 410/2022) and Low Shauna (AAS 572/2022) for admission as advocates and solicitors. Both applicants had disclosed past misconduct: Tay Jie Qi had committed plagiarism during her time at Singapore Management University, and Low Shauna had been involved in a shoplifting incident and a drug-related incident. The Attorney-General, the Law Society of Singapore, and the Singapore Institute of Legal Education did not object to the applications. Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon allowed both applications, finding that both applicants had demonstrated remorse, rehabilitation, and transparency.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Applications for admission in AAS 410 and AAS 572 allowed.
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Applications for admission to the Singapore Bar were granted despite past misconduct, due to voluntary disclosure, remorse, and rehabilitation.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tay Jie Qi | Applicant | Individual | Application Allowed | Won | |
| Low Shauna | Applicant | Individual | Application Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
4. Facts
- Tay Jie Qi committed plagiarism in a research paper during her second year at SMU.
- Tay Jie Qi voluntarily disclosed the plagiarism incident in her admission affidavit.
- Low Shauna attempted to steal an eyeshadow palette from Sephora.
- Low Shauna was issued a stern warning by the police for shoplifting.
- Low Shauna was arrested in a drug-related incident but was later released without further action.
- Low Shauna voluntarily disclosed both incidents in her admission affidavit.
5. Formal Citations
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Low Shauna attempted to steal an eyeshadow palette from Sephora. | |
| Police issued Ms. Low a stern warning in lieu of prosecution. | |
| Low Shauna was arrested with a group due to suspected illegal substances found in a bag. | |
| Tay Jie Qi received an email regarding a violation of SMU’s Code of Academic Integrity. | |
| Tay Jie Qi admitted to plagiarism. | |
| Tay Jie Qi received a Letter of Reprimand from SMU’s University Council of Student Conduct. | |
| Tay Jie Qi filed her originating application to be admitted as an advocate and solicitor. | |
| Tay Jie Qi disclosed the plagiarism incident in her affidavit for admission. | |
| Tay Jie Qi filed a supplementary affidavit detailing the plagiarism incident. | |
| The Attorney-General filed its Notice of Objection to Tay Jie Qi's admission. | |
| Original admission hearing date for AAS 410. | |
| Tay Jie Qi agreed to adjourn her admission hearing for three months. | |
| Low Shauna disclosed two incidents in her affidavit for admission. | |
| Low Shauna filed a supplementary affidavit providing further details of the two incidents. | |
| The Attorney-General stated that Low Shauna was not a fit and proper person to be admitted at that time. | |
| Low Shauna applied to adjourn the hearing of her admission application for three months. | |
| Original admission hearing date for AAS 572. | |
| Second case management conference held for Tay Jie Qi's application. | |
| Court granted leave for the AGC to withdraw its Notice of Objection to Tay Jie Qi's admission. | |
| AGC indicated it would not object to Low Shauna’s admission if she filed a further supplementary affidavit. | |
| Low Shauna filed a further supplementary affidavit. | |
| The Attorney-General withdrew his Notice of Objection to Tay Jie Qi's admission. | |
| Judgment delivered by Sundaresh Menon CJ, allowing both applications for admission. |
7. Legal Issues
- Fitness and Propriety for Admission to the Bar
- Outcome: The court found that both applicants had demonstrated sufficient remorse, rehabilitation, and transparency to be considered fit and proper persons for admission.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Disclosure of past misconduct
- Remorse
- Rehabilitation
- Related Cases:
- [2022] SGHC 133
- [2022] SGHC 237
- [2022] SGHC 93
8. Remedies Sought
- Admission as an Advocate and Solicitor
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Admission to the Bar
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Re Tay Quan Li Leon | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 133 | Singapore | Compared to the present case, to highlight that the applicant in that case cheated in his professional qualifying examinations. |
| Re Wong Wai Loong Sean and other matters | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 237 | Singapore | Cited for the general principles regarding the central inquiry in admission applications and the factors to consider. |
| Re Monisha Devaraj and other matters | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 93 | Singapore | Compared to the present case, to highlight that the applicant in that case cheated in his professional qualifying examinations. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rule 25 of the Legal Profession (Admission) Rules 2011 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Section 12 of the Legal Profession Act 1966 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Admission to the Bar
- Fitness and Propriety
- Disclosure
- Remorse
- Rehabilitation
- Plagiarism
- Shoplifting
- Stern Warning
15.2 Keywords
- admission
- advocate
- solicitor
- plagiarism
- shoplifting
- misconduct
- disclosure
- remorse
- rehabilitation
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Admission to the Bar | 95 |
| Legal Profession Act | 90 |
| Evidence Law | 50 |
| Evidence | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Professional Responsibility