Two partners on opposite sides of a matter, Chandra Mohan Rethnam of Rajah & Tann and Paul Seah Zhen Wei of Tan Kok Quan Partnership, have been handed three-year suspensions by the Court of Three Judges for misleading a five-judge panel on Singapore’s highest court, the Court of Appeal.
Rethnam and Seah were lead counsels for opposing parties in an appeal heard by the court in January 2021 and failed to inform the court that parties had reached a settlement of the underlying disputes in 2019, which made the appeal an academic exercise.
Chandra was representing Metax Eco Solutions while Seah was representing the liquidators of Sembawang Engineers and Constructors (SEC).
Both lawyers carried on with the appeal without informing the court about the settlement until questioned about it during hearing. Rajah & Tann argued on behalf of the liquidators that the appeal was not frivolous as the issue in appeal had wide implications on the conduct of liquidations and other insolvency proceedings. The liquidators and TKQP undertook work for the appeal pro bono because of the importance of the issue.
Rejecting this contention, the court in 2021 found, “It is plain, from the correspondence and the settlement terms, that all parties and their counsel deliberately entered into an agreement to suppress the disclosure of relevant information to the court unless the court should specifically ask for the same. It is equally plain that R&T were aware from as early as July 2019 that a settlement of Suit 965 would render CA 146 ‘merely academic’ and told TKQP as much.”
“It is shocking to us that none of the counsel who appeared, all of whom are from established and reputable law firms, seemed to appreciate the gravity of their breach of duties. The apologies that were proffered to the court appeared to be pro forma without any real acknowledgment of the default. Counsel from TKQP asserted that they did not pervert the course of justice and apologised for causing “inconvenience”. R&T’s apology appeared conditional as it only applied “if there [were] any areas in respect of which [it] could have done better,” the court added.
“The decision of the Honourable Court is an important reminder that we as officers of the court should always uphold our paramount duty to the court while advancing the interests of clients to the best of our ability. The firm will ensure that this is reinforced among our lawyers especially in the light of the court’s decision,” Rajah & Tann told ALB in an email.
Rethnam co-leads the private client practice at Rajah & Tann.
“The decision of the Court of Three Judges underscores the paramount duty owed to the Court. Upholding this duty has been and will remain a key cornerstone of the firm’s practice,” a TKQP spokesperson told ALB.
The Court of Three Judges is the top disciplinary body for lawyers in Singapore and has the power to suspend lawyers or strike them off the rolls.
