THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v RAVI S/O MADASAMY

[2023] SGHC 112 High Court (General Division) 26 April 2023 C3J/OS 2/2022

6 cases cited

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	26 April 2023
Judges	Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Sundaresh Menon, Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim	Legal Profession
Counsel	WongPartnership LLP, Lin Weiqi Wendy, Teo Guo Zheng, Titus

Source: [2023] SGHC 112, High Court (General Division), decided 26 April 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Legal Profession — Disciplinary proceedings

Practice Areas

Legal Profession

Judges (3)

Belinda Ang Saw Ean Coram Sundaresh Menon Delivered Tay Yong Kwang Coram

Counsel (3)

WongPartnership LLP Firm Lin Weiqi Wendy Counsel for the applicant

Teo Guo Zheng, Titus Counsel for the applicant

Parties (2)

Law Society of Singapore Applicant Ravi s/o Madasamy Respondent

Case Significance

Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy [2023] SGHC 112 is a supplemental judgment of the Court of Three Judges, delivered on 26 April 2023 by Sundaresh Menon CJ, sitting with Tay Yong Kwang JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, in Originating Summons No 2 of 2022. Following the court's earlier decision in Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy [2023] SGHC 65 on 21 March 2023, which imposed a five-year suspension under s 83(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act 1966 commencing on the date of that judgment, Mr Ravi s/o Madasamy wrote to the court seeking clarification. He contended that, having already been out of practice for a year beforehand, he was effectively subject to a six-year suspension and asked the court to rectify this.

Summary

Following the Court of Three Judges' decision suspending lawyer Ravi s/o Madasamy for five years under s 83(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act, Mr Ravi sought clarification, arguing his earlier voluntary undertaking not to apply for a practising certificate should count toward the suspension. The court considered whether that voluntary cessation warranted mitigation. Finding his undertaking did not arise from genuine contrition or remorse, the court saw no merit in his further points and declined to adjust the suspension.

What did the court address in Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy [2023] SGHC 112?

The Court of Three Judges, in a supplemental judgment delivered by Sundaresh Menon CJ on 26 April 2023, addressed Mr Ravi s/o Madasamy's request to clarify the five-year suspension imposed under s 83(1)(b) of the Legal Profession Act in its earlier decision [2023] SGHC 65.

Why did Ravi s/o Madasamy seek clarification in Law Society of Singapore v Ravi s/o Madasamy [2023] SGHC 112?

Mr Ravi contended that, because he had already been out of practice for a year before the five-year suspension took effect on the date of the 21 March 2023 judgment, he was effectively suspended for six years, and asked the court to rectify this.