Riaz LLC v Sharil bin Abbas (through his deputy and litigation representative, Salbeah bte Paye)

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Choo Han Teck J
• Judgment Date: 05 September 2013
• Neutral Citation: [2013] SGHC 167
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Bill of Costs No 193 of 2012 (Summons No 3323 of 2013)
• Year: 2013
• Published date: 09 September 2013
• Hearing Date: 04 September 2013,27 August 2013
• Plaintiff Counsel: Adrian Wong and Alywin Goh (Rajah & Tann LLC)
• Defendant Counsel: Anthony Wee (instructed) (Lee Shergill LLP)
• Subject Matter: Legal Profession,Bill of Costs
• Citation: [2013] SGHC 167

Choo Han Teck J:

The applicant, Riaz LLC (“Riaz”), is a firm of solicitors seeking a review of the Assistant Registrar’s (“the AR”) decision disallowing their bill of costs in relation to Suit 539 of 2009 (“S 539”). The respondent is the plaintiff in S 539. The applicant was the solicitor on record for the respondent from 22 June 2009 (when S 539 was filed) to 28 June 2010. From 28 June 2010 onwards, the conduct of S 539 was taken over by the respondent’s present solicitors, Lee Shergill LLP (“Shergill”). The respondent’s litigation representative objected to Riaz’s bill of costs on the basis that the respondent, who is mentally incapacitated, had signed a voidable warrant to act with Riaz.

The respondent, Mr Sharil bin Abbas (“Sharil”), was involved in a road traffic accident on Pasir Panjang Road on 11 December 2007. He suffered brain damage as a result. While in hospital, he was approached by the applicant, who offered to act for him. The respondent and his mother, Salbeah bte Paye (“Salbeah”), saw the applicant solicitor, Mr Riaz Qayyum (“Mr Riaz”) at his office twice after Sharil was discharged from the hospital. A warrant to act was executed (“the Warrant to Act”) with Sharil’s thumb print and Salbeah’s signature. At that time, Salbeah was not appointed as Sharil’s litigation representative under the Mental Capacity Act (Cap 177A, Rev Ed 2010) (“the Mental Capacity Act”).

Mr Riaz filed S 539 on 22 June 2009. Salbeah filed an affidavit on 21 December 2012 stating that the matter did not progress under Mr Riaz. Salbeah then approached Shergill in June 2010 on Sharil’s behalf. Shergill advised Salbeah that S 539 had been wrongly filed as Sharil lacked the mental capacity to have a suit started in his name. Salbeah engaged Shergill on 28 June 2010 and was appointed Sharil’s litigation representative pursuant to the Mental Capacity Act on 11 November 2010. The writ in S 539 was amended to reflect this.

A settlement was subsequently reached in S 539. Mr Riaz sent Salbeah a list of disbursements and costs on 9 and 25 November 2011 respectively. After consulting her lawyers, Salbeah took the position that the Warrant to Act was invalid for lack of capacity and that Mr Riaz was not entitled to costs. The taxation was protracted over a period of 9 months and four and a half months in, the parties settled at $8,000 as costs payable to Mr Riaz. The AR declined to endorse the agreement and requested for a medical report on Sharil’s mental state. The doctor who gave the medical report was cross-examined. He testified that Sharil was mentally incapacitated and that that would have been obvious to any reasonable observer. The AR found that there was no reason to doubt the doctor’s evidence and found that Sharil lacked the mental capacity to contract with Mr Riaz. She thus found that the Warrant to Act was voidable and that there was no contractual obligation to pay Mr Riaz any costs. The AR also found that Mr Riaz should have known that Sharil was in no condition to execute the Warrant to Act.

The Applicant appealed against the AR’s decision. Mr Adrian Wong, counsel for Mr Riaz argued that, at the very least, Mr Riaz is entitled to reasonable costs for his conduct of S 539. He further argued that a quantum meruit is...