[2013] SGHC 135 - Singapore Law Watch

Law Society of Singapore v Kurubalan s/o Manickam Rengaraju [2013] SGHC 135
(a) The Respondent assisted the Claimant to obtain a much larger
payout than she had initially expected;
(b) He had agreed to bear the costs of the proceedings (including
disbursements) without any recourse to the Complainant in the event the
claim failed;
(c) He expressed genuine regret for his actions during the hearing
before the Inquiry Committee; and
(d) The Complainant admitted that she understood the terms of the
Champertous Agreement and had entered into it willingly. Her reason
for not honouring it was simply that she did not expect to have to pay the
Respondent so much money.
Findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal
22 A Disciplinary Tribunal was constituted which heard the matter on
15 October 2012. Two charges each with an alternative were initially preferred
against the Respondent. In the event only the second charge (“the Second
Charge”) was proceeded with. That reads:
You, Kurubalan s/o Manickam Rengaraju, are charged that
on or about 24 April 2006, you did enter into an agreement
with the Complainant by which you were retained or employed
to prosecute a suit, action or contentious proceeding in
respect of injuries sustained by the Complainant in a motorvehicle
incident on 5 July 2003 which stipulated for or
contemplated payment only in the event of success in that
suit, action or proceeding which payment would amount to
30% of the proceeds if the Complainant received less than
AUD$300,000.00 or 40% of the proceeds if the Complainant
received AUD$300,000.00 or more, and such actions by you
are in breach of Section 107(1)(b) read with Section 107(3) of
the Legal Profession Act (Chapter 161) and amount to grossly
improper conduct in the discharge of your professional duty
13