Dr Ang Yong Guan v Singapore Medical Council
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Sundaresh Menon, Tay Yong Kwang |
| Charges / claim | Professions |
| Counsel | Braddell Brothers LLP, Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP, Tan Rajah & Cheah LLP, Chan Yu Jie, Chandra Mohan K Nair, Christopher Chong Fook Choy, Colin Wu Guolin, Kronenburg Edmund Jerome, Sim Mei Jun Audrey, Thng Yu Ting, Angelia |
Source: [2025] SGHC 17, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (10)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHC 17 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 5 February 2025 concerning Professions, specifically addressing medical profession and practice. The judgment was delivered by Belinda Ang Saw Ean, with Sundaresh Menon and Tay Yong Kwang on the coram. The case was brought by Dr Ang Yong Guan (appellant) against Singapore Medical Council (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP and Braddell Brothers LLP. The judgment cites 16 cases and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Medical Registration Act.
[2025] SGHC 17 explained
Dr Ang Yong Guan v Singapore Medical Council ([2025] SGHC 17) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 5 February 2025. It is categorised under Professions. 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 [2025] SGHC 17 about?
Dr Ang Yong Guan v Singapore Medical Council ([2025] SGHC 17) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Professions — Medical profession and practice — Professional conduct”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHC 17 consider?
The judgment refers to Medical Registration Act (Cap 174) and Medical Registration Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGHC 17 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 283. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
Dr Ang Yong Guan, a senior psychiatrist, was found liable by the Court of Three Judges for three charges of professional misconduct for departing from MOH prescribing guidelines in his treatment of a patient over two years, including prescribing benzodiazepines and antipsychotics without proper justification. The court sentenced Dr Ang to a 15-month suspension and ordered him to pay costs of $100,000, noting his treatment fell below the standard expected of a competent psychiatrist.
What was decided in [2025] SGHC 17?
[2025] SGHC 17 (Dr Ang Yong Guan v Singapore Medical Council) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 5 February 2025 addressing Professions, specifically medical profession and practice. The judgment was delivered by Belinda Ang Saw Ean.
Who were the parties in Dr Ang Yong Guan v Singapore Medical Council ([2025] SGHC 17)?
The appellant in [2025] SGHC 17 was Dr Ang Yong Guan, and the respondent was Singapore Medical Council. Legal representation included Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP and Braddell Brothers LLP. The case was decided on 5 February 2025 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 17?
[2025] SGHC 17 was delivered by Belinda Ang Saw Ean in the High Court (General Division) on 5 February 2025. Sundaresh Menon and Tay Yong Kwang also sat on the coram. The case concerned Professions.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 17 cite?
[2025] SGHC 17 cites 16 prior decisions. It references Medical Registration Act.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (16)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 17)