PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v LIM TEAN

[2026] SGHC 44 High Court (General Division) 23 February 2026 • HC/MA 9028/2025/01|HC/MA 9028/2025/02 • 45 min read
20 cases cited (19 SG, 1 foreign)

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing—Sentencing—Appeals—Amalgamated charges Legal Profession—Unauthorised person— Failure to renew practising certificate

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing—Sentencing—Appeals—Amalgamated charges Legal Profession—Unauthorised person— Failure to renew practising certificate

Judges (1)

Kannan Ramesh Delivered

Counsel (6)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Fernandez LLC Firm Bryan Wong Counsel Appellant Mohamed Arshad bin Mohamed Tahir Counsel Respondent Ng Yiwen Counsel Appellant Patrick Fernandez Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Appellant Lim Tean Respondent

Case Significance

[2026] SGHC 44 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 23 February 2026 concerning Criminal Procedure and Sentencing—Sentencing—Appeals—Amalgamated charges and Legal Profession—Unauthorised person— Failure to renew practising certificate. The judgment was delivered by Kannan Ramesh. The case was brought by Public Prosecutor (appellant) against Lim Tean (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Attorney-General's Chambers and Fernandez LLC. The judgment cites 20 cases (19 Singapore, 1 foreign) and references 5 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Evidence Act, and the Legal Profession Act.

Summary

The Prosecution proceeded against Lim Tean, a lawyer and former politician, on criminal charges. The High Court addressed the criminal proceedings and considered the appropriate sentencing for the offences committed.

What was decided in [2026] SGHC 44?

[2026] SGHC 44 (PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v LIM TEAN) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 23 February 2026 addressing Criminal Procedure and Sentencing—Sentencing—Appeals—Amalgamated charges and Legal Profession—Unauthorised person— Failure to renew practising certificate. The judgment was delivered by Kannan Ramesh.

Who were the parties in PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v LIM TEAN?

The appellant in [2026] SGHC 44 was Public Prosecutor, and the respondent was Lim Tean. Legal representation included Fernandez LLC and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 23 February 2026 in the High Court (General Division).

Which judge decided [2026] SGHC 44?

[2026] SGHC 44 was delivered by Kannan Ramesh in the High Court (General Division) on 23 February 2026. The case concerned Criminal Procedure and Sentencing—Sentencing—Appeals—Amalgamated charges and Legal Profession—Unauthorised person— Failure to renew practising certificate.

What cases and statutes does [2026] SGHC 44 cite?

[2026] SGHC 44 cites 20 prior decisions, including 1 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Criminal Procedure Code, Evidence Act, Legal Profession Act.

Statutes Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68)
s 124(4)
Evidence Act (Cap 97)
s 128A
Legal Profession Act (Cap 161)
s 33(1)(a)
Penal Code (Cap 224)
s 182 s 26H s 26H(1) s 26H(4)
Road Traffic Act (Cap 276)
s 43(4)

Cases Cited (20)

SG (7)
[2005] SGDC 129 [2005] SGDC 147 [2006] SGDC 216 [2013] SGDC 268 [2021] SGHC 154 [2025] SGHC 234 [2025] SGMC 33
SLR (12)
[1988] 1 SLR(R) 281 [1995] 2 SLR(R) 766 [1999] 1 SLR(R) 1022 [2002] 2 SLR(R) 566 [2008] 2 SLR(R) 684 [2015] 1 SLR 26 [2016] 4 SLR 1288 [2016] 5 SLR 636 [2017] 2 SLR 449 [2018] 5 SLR 799 [2023] 5 SLR 1646 [2025] 4 SLR 1386
MY (1)
[1962] MLJ 194

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 44)