IRIS KOH SHU CII v The Attorney-General/Public Prosecutor

[2023] SGHC 229 High Court (General Division) 17 August 2023 HC/OA 387/2023

4 cases cited

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	17 August 2023
Judge	See Kee Oon
Charges / claim	Administrative Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Fernandez LLC, Jiang Ke-Yue, Lim Tze Etsuko, Mohamed Arshad bin Mohamed, Patrick Fernandez

Source: [2023] SGHC 229, High Court (General Division), decided 17 August 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Administrative Law — Remedies — Declaration Administrative Law — Remedies — Quashing order Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Complaints to Magistrates

Practice Areas

Administrative Law Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

See Kee Oon Delivered

Counsel (6)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Fernandez LLC Firm Jiang Ke-Yue Counsel for the respondent Lim Tze Etsuko Counsel for the respondent

Mohamed Arshad bin Mohamed Counsel for the applicant

Patrick Fernandez Counsel for the applicant

Parties (2)

Attorney-General Respondent

Koh Shu Cii Iris Applicant

Case Significance

Koh Shu Cii Iris v Attorney-General [2023] SGHC 229 is a grounds of decision of See Kee Oon J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 17 August 2023 in Originating Application No 387 of 2023. The applicant, Koh Shu Cii Iris, sought permission to proceed with judicial review for a quashing order in relation to the Attorney-General's decision, acting as Public Prosecutor, to intervene in and discontinue HC/MA 1/2022/01, together with declaratory relief. The application arose after the police seized the applicant's electronic devices and a legal professional privilege review was conducted. See Kee Oon J dismissed the application.

Summary

Iris Koh Shu Cii applied for permission to proceed with judicial review, seeking a quashing order against the Attorney-General's decision to intervene in and discontinue a Magistrate's Appeal, together with declaratory relief, following the dismissal of her Magistrate's Complaint alleging police breaches of a legal professional privilege review protocol. See Kee Oon J held that the Respondent was justified in its position that the relevant Criminal Procedure Code requirements were not mandatory and afforded no right of appeal. The application and the contingent declaratory relief were dismissed, with costs of $5,000 ordered against the applicant.

What was Koh Shu Cii Iris v Attorney-General [2023] SGHC 229 about?

It was an application by Koh Shu Cii Iris before See Kee Oon J for permission to seek judicial review and a quashing order over the Attorney-General's decision to discontinue HC/MA 1/2022/01, plus declaratory relief. The court dismissed the application on 17 August 2023.

What did the court decide in [2023] SGHC 229?

See Kee Oon J dismissed Koh Shu Cii Iris's application for permission to proceed with judicial review and declaratory relief, which challenged the Attorney-General's decision, acting as Public Prosecutor, to intervene in and discontinue a magistrate's complaint matter.