Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa and Others

• Judge: Choo Han Teck JC
• Judgment Date: 23 April 2002
• Neutral Citation: [2002] SGHC 80
• Citation: [2002] SGHC 80
• Defendant Counsel: Devinder K Rai (Acies Law Corp),Arul Chandran and Ooi Oon Tat (C Arul & Partners)
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Plaintiff Counsel: Kannan Ramesh and Christina Choo (Tan Kok Quan Partnership)
• Date: 29 October 2002
• Docket Number: Originating Summons No 939 of 1991
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Subject Matter: Whether application should be allowed,Application to be discharged as solicitors,Legal Profession,Discharge of counsel,Application following assertions by another solicitor of conflict of interests,Whether solicitors can take neutral position as to whether they should continue to act,Role of court

(Inquiry pursuant to Judgment dated 16 July 1996)

Citation:	OS No 939 of 1991
Jurisdiction:	Singapore
Date:	2002:04:19; 2002:04:12; 2002:04:11
Court:	High Court
Coram:	Choo Han Teck, JC
Counsel:	Plaintiff in person
	Kannan Ramesh and Christina Choo (Tan Kok Quan Partnership) for the First Defendant & Third Party; Arul Chandran and Ooi Oon Tat (C. Arul & Partners) for the Second Defendant; Devinder K Rai (Acies Law Corporation) for the Third & Fourth Defendant

HEADNOTES

Legal Profession – solicitors cannot take a neutral position where allegations made by other solicitor of conflict of interest – the court can only make a ruling of conflict of interest after a full inquiry and not in proceedings for the discharge of a solicitor

Facts

This was an application by Tan Kok Quan Partnership to be discharged from acting as solicitors for the first defendant. The application followed a letter from solicitor for the second defendant taking the view that Tan Kok Quan Partnership, having acted as co-administrator for the first defendant’s late husband’s estate, may be in breach of rule 29 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules. At the resumed hearing, the applicant submitted that although he disputes the allegations of conflict of interests, his firm could not, in the meantime, continue to act without a resolution of the allegations.

Held

A solicitor is entitled to caution his counterpart when he believes that a conflict of interest situation looms in the distance. Whether or not the solicitor concerned agrees with that perception, he must decide whether he is comfortable in continuing so to act. If he decides to continue acting for the client he must be prepared to justify his conduct if necessary. The question as to whether he is right or not may only be determined after a full inquiry; but this court, at this juncture, is not the proper forum to conduct such an inquiry. Following the applicant firm’s statement that the firm could not continue to act without a resolution of the allegations, the application was allowed.

(Application for Discharge)

GROUNDS OF DECISION

1. This was an application by Tan Kok Quan Partnership as solicitors for the first defendant (Lim Lie Hoa) for an order declaring that Tan Kok Quan Partnership has ceased acting for the first defendant, and for the provision of costs although the prayer ought more accurately be for leave to be discharged as solicitors for the first defendant. The application was taken out on 8 April 2002. From the outset, it was a most peculiar application, but I shall have to set out the background leading to the application for a better understanding as to why that is so. The plaintiff is unrepresented in these, as well as the previous proceedings. The second defendant is now represented by Mr. Arul Chandran while the new parties, the third and fourth defendants are represented by Mr. Devinder Rai.

2. In 1991 the plaintiff (Jane Rebecca Ong) sued Lim Lie Hoa and the second defendant (Ong Siauw Tjoan) in this action, that is, Originating Summons 939 of 1991. Ong Siau Tjoan was her estranged husband, and Lim Lie Hoa her mother-in-law (Ong Siau Tjoan's mother). The assets (generally believed to be substantial - declared at one point to be $5,117,269 - by the parties concerned) of Lim Lie Hoa's deceased husband (Ong Seng King) lie at the heart of the dispute because Jane Rebecca Ong claimed that her rights to matrimonial assets included her husband's share in his father's estate. At all material times, Lim Lie Hoa and Ong Siauw Tjoan were the administrators of the said estate. Matters proved far more complicated than it appeared. The first defendant was clearly and, it seems, intractably antagonistic towards the plaintiff and all that she proposed or said. Wavering between his...