Mr Satinder Singh, a businessman, is suing a lawyer who was recently suspended for a year, for the loss of $850,000 which was spent in the course of a property deal. The sum of over $1 million was deposited into an account by Mr Singh as his contribution to a joint plan to develop the property with some other parties. Mr Singh agreed to allow Louis Ang, an undischarged bankrupt to use the funds as he saw fit.
After discovering that only $50,000 was left in the bank account, he lodged a complaint against the lawyer, Mr Uthayasurian, who was alleged to have put himself in a conflict of interests, and failed to advise Mr Singh of the status of Louis Ang and of the dangers of giving Louis Ang the power to use the funds. The Court of Three Judges recently upheld Mr Singh's complaint and suspended Mr Uthayasurian for one year on the grounds that he had placed himself in a conflict of interests position. They stated that this was without prejudice to any finding in any civil lawsuit that Mr Singh might start against Mr Uthayasurian.
Now, Mr Singh's lawsuit has alleged that the lawyer had conspired with Louis Ang to defraud him. The lawyer's defence is first, a denial of the allegation of fraud; second, that Mr Singh was aware of Louis Ang's bankruptcy status and finally, that Mr Singh as an experienced businessman, was aware of the risks of the project.
The property, which is owned by the Brunei government, is a very valuable one in prime area Tanglin Hill.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Insurance premiums for doctors stable
The Medical Protection Society (MPS) is one of the largest medical insurers in Singapore. It is set up as a United Kingdom as a not-for-profit medical defense organisation.
It has stated that medical insurance premiums against lawsuits in relation to the negligence of Singapore doctors will be stable. This shows that claims against Singapore doctors are not likely to rise the forthcoming year. In contrast to the tendency of many United States specialists in the Obstretrics and Gynacology sector to decide to leave the sector because of enormous malpractice insurance premiums, in Singapore, it appears the situation is not as serious - at present, the annual premium is about $25,000, not cheaper but tolerable for a successful surgeon.
It may be that the following factors make lawsuits against doctors less likely in Singapore -
a) in Singapore, the general rule is that the loser of the lawsuit pays the winner's legal fees, which will deter weak or frivilous lawsuits, whereas in the United States; each party pays his own legal fees;
b) US lawyers often work on a contingency fee basis (no win, no fee) which therefore costs nothing for plaintiffs, while this kind of arrangement is not allowed in Singapore; and
c) the acceptance of the court of the Bolam defence referred to in previous postings; and
d) the expense of hiring foreign medical experts to assist in a local plaintiff's claim since the small local profession means that doctors are reluctant to participate in lawsuits against another doctor.
It has stated that medical insurance premiums against lawsuits in relation to the negligence of Singapore doctors will be stable. This shows that claims against Singapore doctors are not likely to rise the forthcoming year. In contrast to the tendency of many United States specialists in the Obstretrics and Gynacology sector to decide to leave the sector because of enormous malpractice insurance premiums, in Singapore, it appears the situation is not as serious - at present, the annual premium is about $25,000, not cheaper but tolerable for a successful surgeon.
It may be that the following factors make lawsuits against doctors less likely in Singapore -
a) in Singapore, the general rule is that the loser of the lawsuit pays the winner's legal fees, which will deter weak or frivilous lawsuits, whereas in the United States; each party pays his own legal fees;
b) US lawyers often work on a contingency fee basis (no win, no fee) which therefore costs nothing for plaintiffs, while this kind of arrangement is not allowed in Singapore; and
c) the acceptance of the court of the Bolam defence referred to in previous postings; and
d) the expense of hiring foreign medical experts to assist in a local plaintiff's claim since the small local profession means that doctors are reluctant to participate in lawsuits against another doctor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)