Attorney-General v. Shahira Banu: Legal Profession - Duty of Candour in Admission to the Bar
In Attorney-General v. Shahira Banu, the Court of 3 Supreme Court Judges of the Republic of Singapore addressed an application by the Attorney-General to strike Ms. Shahira Banu off the roll of advocates and solicitors for failing to disclose a material fact—her commission of an academic offense of plagiarism—in her affidavit for admission to the Bar. The court found that Ms. Banu's affidavit contained a substantially false statement and suppressed a material fact, violating her duty of candour. Consequently, the court ordered that Ms. Banu be struck off the Roll, stipulating a minimum reinstatement interval of four years, subject to evidence of rehabilitative efforts and satisfactory appreciation of her ethical duties.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of 3 Supreme Court Judges of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
The Respondent was struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors.
1.3 Case Type
Regulatory
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The court struck Shahira Banu off the roll of advocates and solicitors for failing to disclose an academic offense in her admission affidavit, breaching her duty of candour.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Applicant | Government Agency | Application Allowed | Won | Jeyendran s/o Jeyapal of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lim Toh Han of Attorney-General’s Chambers Pesdy Tay of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Law Society of Singapore | Other | Statutory Board | Neutral | Neutral | |
| Shahira Banu d/o Khaja Moinudeen | Respondent | Individual | Struck off the Roll | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Steven Chong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Andrew Phang | Senior Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jeyendran s/o Jeyapal | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Toh Han | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Pesdy Tay | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Sanjiv Rajan | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Kenneth Lim Tao Chung | Allen & Gledhill LLP |
| Nakoorsha bin Abdul Kadir | Nakoorsha Law Corporation |
| Rasveen Kaur | Nakoorsha Law Corporation |
| Michelle Tan Hui Ming | Nakoorsha Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The Respondent committed an academic offence of plagiarism during her second year of law school at NUS.
- The Respondent did not disclose the academic offence in her affidavit for admission to the Bar.
- The Attorney-General applied to strike the Respondent off the roll of advocates and solicitors.
- The Respondent claimed she inadvertently omitted the academic offence due to overlooking a footnote in the admission form.
- The Respondent relied on an outdated version of the Legal Profession (Admission) Regulations 2011.
- The SILE sent emails to the Respondent with a guide reminding applicants to declare any facts affecting their suitability to practice.
- The court found that the Respondent's non-disclosure was not inadvertent and constituted a breach of her duty of candour.
5. Formal Citations
- Attorney-General v Shahira Banu d/o Khaja Moinudeen, Originating Application No 15 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 111
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Respondent took Constitutional and Administrative Law module at NUS. | |
| Respondent completed take-home examination for the CAAL module. | |
| Respondent was issued a preliminary Academic Offence Report by NUS. | |
| Respondent attended an Inquiry Panel at NUS. | |
| Final Academic Offence Report issued by Prof Tan. | |
| Respondent filed her application for admission as an A&S. | |
| Respondent's affidavit for admission affirmed and submitted. | |
| Respondent filed a second affidavit for admission. | |
| The AG issued a Letter of No Objections to the Respondent’s admission application. | |
| Respondent was admitted as an A&S and placed on the Roll. | |
| The AG filed the Originating Application. | |
| Respondent deposed a first affidavit in these proceedings. | |
| Respondent sought leave to file a supplementary affidavit. | |
| Court granted Respondent leave to file a supplementary affidavit. | |
| Hearing held. | |
| Judgment delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Duty of Candour
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent breached her duty of candour by failing to disclose her academic offence in her affidavit for admission.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Suppression of material fact
- False statement in affidavit
- Suitability for Admission to the Bar
- Outcome: The court determined that the Respondent's non-disclosure affected her suitability for admission to the Bar.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Good character
- Ethical conduct
8. Remedies Sought
- Striking off from the Roll of Advocates and Solicitors
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Duty of Candour
- Suppression of Material Fact
- False Statement in Affidavit
10. Practice Areas
- Regulatory Law
- Professional Conduct
11. Industries
- Legal Services
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law Society of Singapore v Udeh Kumar s/o Sethuraju and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 1369 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that advocates and solicitors have a special role as officers of the court to assist in the administration of justice. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Ravindra Samuel | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 266 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the public must be able to repose confidence in a profession which plays so indispensable a part in the administration of justice. |
| Bachoo Mohan Singh v Public Prosecutor and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 4 SLR 137 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that central among a solicitor’s ethical duties is the duty of candour to the court. |
| Re Ong Pei Qi, Stasia | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 61 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish the present case from a case where an applicant disclosed their academic offence. |
| Re Tay Quan Li Leon | High Court | Yes | [2022] 5 SLR 896 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where plagiarism and academic misconduct had been found by the court to amount to serious misconduct affecting one’s suitability for admission to the Bar. |
| Re Wong Wai Loong Sean and other matters | High Court | Yes | [2023] 4 SLR 541 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where academic misconduct had been found by the court to amount to serious misconduct affecting one’s suitability for admission to the Bar. |
| Re Tay Jie Qi and another matter | High Court | Yes | [2023] 4 SLR 1258 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where academic offences were relevant in determining an aspiring A&S’s suitability for admission to the Bar. |
| Law Society of Singapore v de Souza Christopher James | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 318 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that assessing whether conduct amounts to suppression involves both an objective inquiry as to whether there was suppression of evidence, and a subjective inquiry into the intention of the suppressor. |
| Nathan Edmund v Law Society of Singapore | High Court | Yes | [2013] 1 SLR 719 | Singapore | Cited for the factors the court will typically take into account when considering an application for restoration to the Roll by an A&S who has been struck off for a disciplinary offence. |
| Re Gabriel Silas Tang Rafferty | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 82 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the length of the reinstatement interval as between two different applicants may not correspond to the relative gravity of their respective acts of misconduct. |
| Public Trustee and another v By Products Traders Pte Ltd and others | High Court | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR(R) 449 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the duty of candour is indivisible, uncompromising, and enduring. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Nor’ain bte Abu Bakar and others | High Court | Yes | [2009] 1 SLR(R) 753 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the duty of candour extends to both the passive concealment of material facts and active misrepresentation. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Chia Choon Yang | High Court | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 1068 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that breaches of the duty of candour will be viewed sternly by the court. |
| Loh Der Ming Andrew v Koh Tien Hua | High Court | Yes | [2022] 3 SLR 1417 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that breaches of the duty of candour will be viewed sternly by the court. |
| Tee Soon Kay v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2007] 3 SLR(R) 133 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the title of Part 2A can be taken notice of by the court. |
| Ratnam Alfred Christie v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 685 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the title of Part 2A can be taken notice of by the court. |
| Re Suria Shaik Aziz | High Court | Yes | [2023] 5 SLR 1272 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the requirement of good character extends to part call applications as much as it does to applications for admission as an A&S. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015, rule 9(1)(a) |
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules, rule 4(a) |
| Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules, rule 10(3)(a) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Legal Profession Act 1966 | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act 1966, section 16(4) | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act 1966, section 98 | Singapore |
| Legal Profession Act 1966, section 13(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act 1965, section 6 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Duty of Candour
- Academic Offence
- Admission to the Bar
- Material Fact
- Good Character
- Reinstatement Interval
- Affidavit for Admission
- Legal Profession Act
- Legal Profession (Admission) Regulations
- SILE Guide
- Non-Disclosure
- Ethical Insight
15.2 Keywords
- Legal Profession
- Duty of Candour
- Admission to Bar
- Striking Off
- Academic Misconduct
- Plagiarism
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Duty of Candour | 100 |
| Legal Profession Act | 95 |
| Disciplinary Proceedings | 90 |
| Admission to the Bar | 90 |
16. Subjects
- Legal Ethics
- Professional Responsibility
- Regulatory Offences