THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v WILLJUDE VIMALRAJ S/O RAYMOND SURAS
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Hri Kumar Nair, Sundaresh Menon |
| Charges / claim | Legal Profession |
| Counsel | Allen & Gledhill LLP, Exodus Law Corporation, Bay Jia Wei, Jonathan Kenric Trachsel, Ramesh s/o Selvaraj, Xu Daniel Atticus |
Source: [2026] SGHC 22, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
[2026] SGHC 22 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 22 January 2026 concerning Legal Profession, specifically addressing disciplinary proceedings. The judgment was delivered by Sundaresh Menon, with Belinda Ang Saw Ean and Hri Kumar Nair on the coram. The case was brought by The Law Society of Singapore (applicant) against Willjude Vimalraj s/o Raymond Suras (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Allen & Gledhill LLP and Exodus Law Corporation. The judgment cites 5 cases and references 2 statutory provisions, including the Legal Profession Act and the Penal Code.
[2026] SGHC 22 explained
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v WILLJUDE VIMALRAJ S/O RAYMOND SURAS ([2026] SGHC 22) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 22 January 2026. It is categorised under 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 [2026] SGHC 22 about?
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v WILLJUDE VIMALRAJ S/O RAYMOND SURAS ([2026] SGHC 22) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Legal Profession — Disciplinary proceedings”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC 22 consider?
The judgment refers to Legal Profession Act (Cap 161) and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGHC 22 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 214. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
The Law Society of Singapore applied for a lawyer to show cause why he should not be sanctioned under the Legal Profession Act for professional misconduct. The court addressed the appropriate sanction for the lawyer's conduct, considering the gravity of the misconduct and the need to protect public confidence in the legal profession.
What was decided in [2026] SGHC 22?
[2026] SGHC 22 (THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v WILLJUDE VIMALRAJ S/O RAYMOND SURAS) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 22 January 2026 addressing Legal Profession, specifically disciplinary proceedings. The judgment was delivered by Sundaresh Menon.
Who were the parties in THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v WILLJUDE VIMALRAJ S/O RAYMOND SURAS ([2026] SGHC 22)?
The applicant in [2026] SGHC 22 was The Law Society of Singapore, and the respondent was Willjude Vimalraj s/o Raymond Suras. Legal representation included Allen & Gledhill LLP and Exodus Law Corporation. The case was decided on 22 January 2026 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2026] SGHC 22?
[2026] SGHC 22 was delivered by Sundaresh Menon in the High Court (General Division) on 22 January 2026. Belinda Ang Saw Ean and Hri Kumar Nair also sat on the coram. The case concerned Legal Profession.
What cases and statutes does [2026] SGHC 22 cite?
[2026] SGHC 22 cites 5 prior decisions. It references Legal Profession Act, Penal Code.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (5)
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 ([2026] SGHC 22)