TAN BENG HUI CAROLYN v The Law Society of Singapore

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 7 consider?

The judgment refers to Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Interpretation Act (Cap 1), and Legal Profession Act (Cap 161), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGCA 7 Court of Appeal 22 February 2023 CA/CA 16/2022 33 min read

5 cases cited

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	22 February 2023
Judges	Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Judith Prakash, Sundaresh Menon
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure, Courts and Jurisdiction, Legal Profession
Counsel	Cecilia Hendrick LLC, Tan & Au LLP, WongPartnership LLP, Au Thye Chuen, Cecilia Hendrick, Felicia Soong Wanyi, K Chandra Sekaran, Leong De Shun Kevin, Rajan Menon Smitha

Source: [2023] SGCA 7, Court of Appeal, decided 22 February 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure - Appeals - Forum Courts and Jurisdiction - Appellate Legal Profession - Professional conduct - Breach - Penalty

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Courts and Jurisdiction Legal Profession

Judges (3)

Belinda Ang Saw Ean Delivered Judith Prakash Coram Sundaresh Menon Coram

Counsel (9)

Cecilia Hendrick LLC Firm Tan & Au LLP Firm WongPartnership LLP Firm Au Thye Chuen Counsel Appellant Cecilia Hendrick Counsel Appellant Felicia Soong Wanyi Counsel Respondent K Chandra Sekaran Counsel Appellant Leong De Shun Kevin Counsel Appellant Rajan Menon Smitha Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

The Law Society of Singapore Respondent Tan Beng Hui Carolyn Appellant

Case Significance

Decided 22 February 2023 by the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No 16 of 2022), comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Judith Prakash JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA (who delivered the grounds of decision), this was Tan Beng Hui Carolyn's appeal against a High Court judge's dismissal of her application under s 95 of the Legal Profession Act to review and set aside the Council of the Law Society's decision to impose a $10,000 penalty for her breaches of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015. The court dismissed the appeal on 12 September 2022. Its reasons turned mainly on a preliminary jurisdictional issue: whether the appellant ought to have brought her appeal to the Appellate Division of the High Court instead of to the Court of Appeal.

[2023] SGCA 7 explained

TAN BENG HUI CAROLYN v The Law Society of Singapore ([2023] SGCA 7) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 22 February 2023. It is categorised under Civil Procedure, Courts and Jurisdiction, and Legal Profession. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGCA 7 about?

TAN BENG HUI CAROLYN v The Law Society of Singapore ([2023] SGCA 7) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Civil Procedure - Appeals - Forum”, “Courts and Jurisdiction - Appellate”, and “Legal Profession - Professional conduct - Breach - Penalty”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 7 consider?

The judgment refers to Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap 30B), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Interpretation Act (Cap 1), and Legal Profession Act (Cap 161), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What did the Court of Appeal decide in Tan Beng Hui Carolyn v Law Society of Singapore [2023] SGCA 7?

The Court of Appeal dismissed Tan Beng Hui Carolyn's appeal on 12 September 2022. She had challenged a $10,000 penalty imposed by the Law Society Council for breaches of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015; the decision turned mainly on a preliminary jurisdictional issue.

What was the jurisdictional issue in [2023] SGCA 7?

The preliminary issue was whether Tan Beng Hui Carolyn ought to have brought her appeal to the Appellate Division of the High Court instead of the Court of Appeal. The panel comprised Sundaresh Menon CJ, Judith Prakash JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, who delivered the grounds.