Achievers LLC v Legal Aid Bureau

Facts

Achievers LLC, a law practice, had acted for a legally aided person in divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court (Syariah Court Summons No 61241) on the instructions of the Legal Aid Bureau. Under reg 15 of the Legal Aid and Advice Regulations (LAAR), a bill of costs for such work must be assessed. On 4 March 2026 the firm filed District Court Bill of Costs No 4 of 2026 (DC/BCS 4/2026) to have its bill of $8,570 assessed. It filed with it a letter of 27 January 2026 in which the Bureau consented to that sum being assessed, and the Bureau's provisional grant of aid.

At the first hearing on 18 March 2026 the Deputy Registrar questioned whether the District Court had jurisdiction, since the underlying proceedings were in the Syariah Court, and adjourned the matter for counsel to research the point. The application was heard again on 15 April 2026. The grounds were published to make clear that such applications may be filed in the District Court.

Issues

1. Whether reg 15(2) of the LAAR required the bill to be assessed in the Syariah Court, where the underlying proceedings were heard
2. Whether the Syariah Court has power to assess a solicitor's bill of costs
3. Whether reg 15(2)(b) should be given a rectifying construction so that the bill could be assessed in the State Courts

Holding

The District Court held that it had jurisdiction to hear and determine the application. Reading the word "award" in reg 15(2)(b) of the LAAR as "assess", it ruled that a legal aid solicitor's bill for work in Syariah Court proceedings is to be assessed in the State Courts or the General Division of the High Court. It assessed the bill and allowed the application as drawn.

Reasoning

Regulation 15(2) sends an aided person's costs for assessment to the court where the proceedings were heard, unless that court has no power to award costs, in which case they go to the State Courts or the High Court depending on the amount. The Syariah Court plainly can award costs. But s 53B of the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966 and r 31 of the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Rules deal only with party-and-party costs orders and the quantum of such orders, not with a solicitor's own bill. Assessment of a solicitor's bill is governed by s 120 of the Legal Profession Act 1966, and s 116(1) defines "court" and "Registrar" for that Part without including the Syariah Court or its registrar. The Deputy Registrar stressed that this view was reached only to decide the District Court's own jurisdiction and was not a definitive ruling on the Syariah Court's powers.

Read literally, reg 15(2) would require a bill to be assessed by a court that cannot assess it, simply because it can award costs. That result was unworkable and would also put subsidiary legislation in conflict with the Legal Profession Act, contrary to s 19(c) of the Interpretation Act 1965. Applying the three requirements for a rectifying construction set out in Nam Hong Construction & Engineering Pte Ltd v Kori Construction (S) Pte Ltd [2016] 4 SLR 604, and the guidance in Kenneth Lum Hsien Loong v Public Prosecutor [2026] SGHC 89, the court found that the purpose of reg 15 was clear (assessment of legal aid solicitors' bills), that the drafter had overlooked the point, and that the missing word could be stated with certainty. It therefore substituted "assess" for "award".

From the judgment