LITT
Try LITT free
Law Society of Singapore v K V Sudeep Kumar and another [2026] SGHC 9
A solicitor who knowingly allows a disbarred lawyer to practise law and exercise de facto control over a case commits serious professional misconduct warranting severe sanctions, including striking off for senior practitioners with antecedents.
CBB v Wong Tien Leong William [2026] SGHC 53
In CBB v Wong Tien Leong William, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Evidence — Admissibility of evidence, Legal Profession — Disciplinary procedures.
Re Tan Jia Wei Zenn and other matters [2026] SGHC 46
The court held that exclusionary periods for LNP admission applications should generally commence from the date of the court order, rather than after the completion of the Practice Training Period, as rehabilitation and training are not mutually exclusive.
Law Society of Singapore v Willjude Vimalraj s/o Raymond Suras [2026] SGHC 22
Dishonesty integral to a criminal conviction of a solicitor is a ground for striking off the Roll, as it reveals a character defect rendering the solicitor unfit for the profession.
Re Smith, Tom KC [2025] SGHC 9
The Singapore High Court in Re Smith, Tom KC [2025] SGHC 9 dismissed an application for ad hoc admission of foreign counsel, ruling that a preference for Senior Counsel does not justify admission when competent local representation is available.
Re DOC [2025] SGHC 72
In Re DOC [2025] SGHC 72, the Court dismissed an application for admission to the bar due to persistent academic dishonesty and lack of candour. A five-year exclusionary period was imposed, emphasizing that reapplication requires objective, verifiable evidence of character rehabilitation.
Law Society of Singapore v Chen Kok Siang Joseph and another matter [2025] SGHC 44
A solicitor who engages in dishonest conduct, prefers their own interests over their client's, and fails to supervise staff in a way that allows for the unauthorized practice of law, is unfit to remain on the roll of advocates and solicitors.
Sunil Kishinchand Bhojwani v Law Society of Singapore [2025] SGHC 244
In Sunil Kishinchand Bhojwani v Law Society of Singapore, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Legal Profession — Disciplinary proceedings, Legal Profession — Professional conduct.
Law Society of Singapore v Yeo Yao Hui Charles (Yang Yaohui) and other matters [2025] SGHC 234
A legal practitioner who demonstrates systemic professional misconduct, dishonesty, and a lack of integrity, including the mismanagement of client funds and abuse of court process, is unfit to remain on the roll of advocates and solicitors.
Law Society of Singapore v Tan Jeh Yaw [2025] SGHC 230
In Law Society of Singapore v Tan Jeh Yaw, the High Court of the Republic of Singapore addressed issues of Legal Profession — Disciplinary proceedings, Legal Profession — Show cause action.
Law Society of Singapore v Li Zhongsheng [2025] SGHC 205
Misconduct involving dishonesty by a solicitor will almost invariably warrant striking off the Roll, as it reveals a character defect rendering the solicitor unsuitable for the profession.
Law Society of Singapore v Dhanwant Singh [2025] SGHC 175
A lawyer's total failure to supervise a conveyancing clerk for a prolonged period, which enabled the clerk to misappropriate client funds and deceive the client, constitutes serious misconduct warranting a significant period of suspension.
Rai Vijay Kumar v Law Society of Singapore [2025] SGHC 159
The court held that it does not have the power under s 97 of the Legal Profession Act to declare a claimant not guilty or to reduce a penalty imposed by a Disciplinary Tribunal; its powers are limited to remitting the matter for rehearing or directing a new tribunal.
Re Ariffin Iskandar Sha bin Ali Akbar and other matters [2025] SGHC 156
The court clarified that for Legacy Cases under the 2024 admission regime, exclusionary periods of 12 months or more should be effected by a stay of the application to avoid deemed discontinuance under the Rules of Court 2021.
Re Pulara Devminie Somachandra [2025] SGHC 155
The principle of open justice is the predominant interest in admission proceedings, and anonymisation will only be granted if there is credible evidence of an imminent and credible threat of grave and disproportionate harm.
Lun Yaodong Clarence v Law Society of Singapore [2025] SGHC 137
The court held that an applicant for judicial review must establish an arguable and prima facie case of reasonable suspicion, and that the Review Committee's function is to act as a sifting mechanism to weed out frivolous complaints.
Law Society of Singapore v Yeo Poh Tiang (alias Yang Baozhen) [2025] SGHC 136
False attestation by a solicitor, even if done with a belief in the client's intent, constitutes dishonesty and grossly improper conduct warranting disciplinary sanction.
Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar and another [2025] SGCA 2
A Disciplinary Tribunal has a statutory duty to 'hear and investigate' a matter, which requires it to proactively exercise its case management powers to facilitate the adduction of relevant and material evidence when parties face procedural difficulties.
Law Society of Singapore v Ezekiel Peter Latimer [2024] SGHC 90
The court held that a solicitor's sustained pattern of offensive conduct, including failure to disclose material information and mismanagement of client matters, warrants striking off the Roll of Advocates and Solicitors when it reveals a character defect rendering the solicitor
Re Gabriel Silas Tang Rafferty [2024] SGHC 82
The court dismissed an admission application due to the applicant's lack of candour and repeated academic misconduct, holding that dismissal is necessary when character deficits are severe and the applicant has not demonstrated genuine rehabilitation.
Re Ong Pei Qi Stasia [2024] SGHC 61
The court held that an applicant for admission to the Bar who has committed academic misconduct may be admitted if they demonstrate genuine remorse, candour, and rehabilitation, particularly through voluntary disclosure of the misconduct.
Law Society of Singapore v Kasturibai d/o Manickam [2024] SGHC 55
False attestation of documents by a solicitor, even without personal gain or character defect, constitutes professional misconduct warranting suspension.
Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar and another [2024] SGHC 28
The court held that a Disciplinary Tribunal is not under a duty to provide views or advice on hypothetical issues, and that it is the court, not the Disciplinary Tribunal, that has the power to grant substituted service orders for attendance orders.
Kassimatis, Theodoros KC v Attorney-General and another and another matter [2024] SGHC 24
The court held that foreign counsel seeking ad hoc admission must meet the mandatory requirements of s 15(1) of the Legal Profession Act 1966, including demonstrating special qualifications or experience relevant to the specific issues of the case, and must show a 'special reason