Dialogue Session with the Minister of State for Education | We Could Have Danced All Night | Professor Tommy Koh | Meeting with the Delegation from the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China | AGM and EOGM | The Business of Sport - Legal and Commercial Issues | Law Society Elections 2001 | 4th Charity Golf Tournament | Pupillage Guidelines | General Pupillage Check List
As part of an effort to obtain feedback from professionals in Singapore, the Ministry of Law arranged for a dialogue session between our members and the Minister of State for Education, Mr Peter Chen. The session, held over tea on 16 October 2001 at the Law Society's Conference Room, attracted over 30 practitioners.
Mr Chen was accompanied by officials from the Ministry of Law. He explained that the meeting was called so that he could gain a better understanding of the issues and problems facing legal practitioners and then communicate them to the authorities for their information and action. Members at the meeting took the opportunity to voice their concerns candidly and fervently, such as:
There were also some interesting suggestions put to the Minister, such as:
The session was lively and educational for all, and participants expressed the hope that there would be more such sessions in future. Mr Chen said he would bring the matters raised to the authorities concerned.
Naresh Mahtani
Law Society of Singapore
|
|
Dressed to the nines, the ladies in glittering finery and the gentlemen in suave suits, sashayed into the Ballroom of the Westin Stamford and Westin Plaza on 20 October 2001 in eager anticipation of a red letter day in the Law Society's yearly calendar - its Dinner and Dance. Members from both the bench and bar treated themselves to a night of glorious food, great entertainment and groovy dancing in the company of brethren from the legal fraternity.
Instead of the standard nine-course fare that is usually served up at such dinners, this year's D&D attendees were tempted with an unusual and exotic menu of fusion food. Luscious prawn and scallop kebabs, creamy mushroom soup and spicy tandoori chicken went down very well with many. Breaths were held as lucky draw numbers were called out and six lucky winners walked away with meal vouchers, wine hampers and spa treatments, courtesy of the Westin, Euraco Fine Foods and Amrita Spa. Plaques of appreciation for contributions to the Law Society, traditionally presented at the D&D, went to Mr Mathavan Devadas and Mr Lim Seng Siew (both 'Friends of the Law Society'), Mr Roy Chua Keng Loy, Mr Derrick Wong Ong Eu, Ms Judy Loke, Mr Andrew Chan, Mr Ho Meng Third and Mr Godwin Campos. It was also announced that Prof Tommy Koh, Singapore's Ambassador-at-large, has been appointed an honorary member of the Law Society. Unfortunately, Prof Koh was unable to grace the occasion as he was overseas. There was a stir of excitement when the time came for the Legal Eagle Award to be given out. This year's winner, Mr Subhas Anandan, received the award amid rousing applause from the audience. The highlight of the evening was the much-touted performance by the Instant Café Theatre. Their spot-on and humourous takes on Malaysian and Singaporean life as well as wicked and raunchy spoofs on subjects ranging from Hello Kitty dolls to viagra, had the audience in stitches.
The night of revelry stretched endlessly for the more energetic members who took eagerly to the dance floor, while their other compatriots decided to call it an early night or adjourn to nearby coffee jaunts for a late night latte. However the night ended, this was no doubt an enjoyable time for all, a chance for members of the profession to let down their hair and relax openly, away from the harried halls of practice and the courts.
 |
The Chief Justice Yong Pung How flanked on his right by Mr Palakrishnan, SC, and on his left by Mr Goh Phai Cheng, SC. Looking on is Mr Chiam Boon Keng. |
| Dinner guests show off their pearly smiles |  |
 |
Instant Cafe Theatre entertains to howls of laughter |
| Mr Roy Chua receiving a certificate of appreciation from Mrs Arfat Selvam, Vice President of the Law Society |  |
Sharmaine Lau
Law Society of Singapore
Prof Tommy Koh was
appointed an honorary member of the Law Society of Singapore at the Society's
Dinner & Dance on 20 October 2001. Here's more about Prof Koh's
distinguished career.
Professor Tommy Koh is currently Ambassador-at-large at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Director of the Institute of Policy Studies. He is also a Director of the DBS Bank and Chairman of the Chinese Heritage Centre.
Prof Koh was the Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Singapore from 1971 to 1974. He was Singapore's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, New York, from 1968 to 1971 (concurrently accredited as High Commissioner to Canada) and again from 1974 to 1984 (concurrently accredited as High Commissioner to Canada and Ambassador to Mexico). He was Ambassador to the United States of America from 1984 to 1990. He was President of the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea from 1980 to 1982. He was Chairman of the Preparatory Committee and the Main Committee of the UN Conference on Environment and Development from 1990 to 1992. He was Chairman of the National Arts Council from 1991 to 1996 and Director of the Institute of Policy Studies from 1990 to February 1997. From February 1997 to October 2000, he served as the founding Executive Director of the Asia-Europe Foundation.
Prof Koh was appointed by the United Nations Secretary-General as his Special Envoy to lead a mission to the Russian Federation, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia in August/September 1993. Prof Koh was a member of a WTO Panel considering the dispute between the US and EC over the Helms Burton Act from February 1997 to April 1998. He was also a member of the UN Task Force on Environment and Human Settlements from March to June 1998. He was chairman of a WTO Panel to consider a dispute between the US and New Zealand on the one hand and Canada on the other hand over milk and dairy products from August 1998 to October 1999. He was again appointed chairman of a WTO dispute panel concerning safeguard measures imposed by the US on imports of fresh, chilled or frozen lamb from New Zealand and Australia from March to December 2000.
Prof Koh was the Second Arthur & Frank Payne Visiting Professor at the Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, USA, for 1994/95. Prof Koh is on the Board of Directors of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. He is a member of the International Council of The Asia Society (New York), and the Advisory Board of the Centre for Strategic & International Studies (Washington).
Prof Koh received a First Class Honours degree in Law from the University of Singapore, has a Masters degree in Law from Harvard University and a post-graduate Diploma in Criminology from Cambridge University. He was conferred a full professorship in 1977. In 1984, Prof Koh was awarded an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Laws from Yale University. He has also received awards from Columbia University, Stanford University, Georgetown University and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.
For his service to the nation, Prof Koh was awarded the Public Service Star in 1971, the Meritorious Service Medal in 1979 and the Distinguished Service Order Award in 1990. Prof Koh was appointed Commander in the Order of the Golden Ark by HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands in March 1993. He received the award of the Grand Cross of the Order of Bernardo O'Higgins from the Government of Chile on 3 April 1997. He also received the 1996 Elizabeth Haub Prize from the University of Brussels and the International Council on Environmental Law on 17 April 1997. Prof Koh was awarded the 1998 Fok Ying Tung Southeast Asia Prize by the Fok Ying Tung Foundation in Hong Kong on 29 May 1998. On 22 February 2000 he was awarded the 'Commander, First Class, of the Order of the Lion of Finland' by the President of Finland, HE Mr Martti Ahtisaari. On 30 April 2000, he was awarded the John Curtin Medal by the Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia. On 2 May 2000, he was conferred the title of 'Grand Officer in the Order of Merit of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg' by the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, HE Mr Jean-Claude Juncker. On 26 August 2000, Prof Koh was presented the LASALLE-SIA College Award for Distinguished Service to Arts Education. On 6 August 2001, he was conferred the rank of Officer in the Order of the Legion of Honour by the President of the French Republic, HE Mr Jacques Chirac.
|
|
A delegation of judges and court officials from the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China paid a visit to the Law Society of Singapore on Wednesday, 24 October 2001. The delegation was led by Mr Jiang Xingchang, Vice President of the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China, who had previously visited the Law Society in 1995 when he was President of the Yunnan Law Association. He said that he was glad to have the opportunity to come see us again and was heartened by the warm reception always extended by the Law Society.
The delegation was in Singapore to get a better understanding of our judicial and legal system; as the Chinese court system is currently undergoing restructuring, especially in the fields of recruitment and training, as well as checks and balances. They also wanted to understand the regulatory and disciplinary functions of the Law Society.
The matters discussed at the meeting covered issues such as mandatory membership of the Law Society, the standards of behaviour expected of lawyers in Singapore and the disciplinary process. The delegation was also given a brief overview of the activities of the Law Society's Criminal Legal Aid Scheme.
As the delegates did not speak English and their interpreter was not familiar with Singapore's legal jargon, Mr Yang Ing Loong, a member of our International Relations Committee, assisted in the interpretation of the more technical areas of discussion. Delegates and hosts alike were most impressed with his linguistic prowess! The Law Society thanks Mr Yang for his kind assistance.
Adeline Ang
Law Society of Singapore
|
|
Over 90 members of the Law Society gathered at the Westin Hotel at dusk on 25 October 2001 for two important meetings: first, the Annual General Meeting ('AGM'), required by statute to be held in October every year, and second, an Extra-ordinary General Meeting ('EOGM'), requisitioned by 77 members, to consider a proposed resolution to allow lawyers to carry out real estate work.
As usual, prior to the meetings proper, all attendees enjoyed a delicious tea spread and a chance to catch up with each other (plus exchange views and positions on the hot topic to be discussed at the EOGM!).
AGM
As in recent years, there were brief presentations by representatives of some of
the Law Society committees on their activities for the year, in conjunction with
the adoption of the Annual Report for the year. Mr David Nayar informed the
meeting of the amended Welfare Fund rules being implemented by the Social &
Welfare Committee; while Mr Quentin Loh, SC, highlighted that insurance rates,
following the recent world events after 11 September 2001, was a matter being
considered by the Professional Indemnity Committee; and Mr Naresh Mahtani, CEO,
on behalf of the ADR Committee, reported on the proposed new rules and scheme,
for Mediation and Arbitration of Disputes relating to Costs, to be launched in
early 2002.
The Assistant Treasurer, Mr M Sivakumar, gave a presentation of the state of the finances of the Society, prior to adoption of the accounts for the year, and the steps that ought to be taken in the ensuing year for improving the financial state of the Society.
During the 'Any Other Business' segment, there were a few questions such as the difficult subjects of the financing of disciplinary proceedings by the Society, raising of funds for the Society and related issues.
EOGM
During the much anticipated EOGM, representatives of the requisitionists moved a
resolution for the Society to adopt and implement a proposed Solicitors' Real
Estate Scheme ('SRES').
Mr Derrick Wong, the former Chairman of the Conveyancing Practice Committee, reminded the meeting that in 1997, the Conveyancing Committee was tasked with studying measures to widen the scope of work that can be done by conveyancing lawyers, and this resulted eventually in the proposal for the SRES. The proposed SRES came about after many meetings as well as a trip to the United Kingdom to study a similar scheme in existence there for many years. Also, since other professions were now carrying out activities which were traditionally within the domain of the legal profession, perhaps the time had come for lawyers to be allowed to widen the scope of services they can offer to the public.
Mr Gan Hiang Chye, the current Chairman of the Conveyancing Practice Committee, pointed out that the recent Practice Direction on 'Solicitor's Finders Fees' already allowed solicitors to earn finder's fees for introducing buyers and sellers, provided that they do not earn such finders' fees if they subsequently act as solicitors in the conveyances of the properties concerned.
A number of members spoke up either for or against the proposed resolution. Some members urged that a further study be taken on the matter to find a good way forward, instead of merely being 'for' or 'against' the proposed measures. That study would involve factors such as ethical issues, regulation or 'over-regulation' of the profession, the repercussions of allowing the SRES (such as real estate agents in turn asking for the fight to do conveyancing), insurance issues and related consequences.
Subsequently, an amended resolution was passed, by a vote of 43 to 17, which provided that the matter be referred to the Ethics Committee, Professional Indemnity Committee, Conveyancing Practice Committee and to the members of the Society for their views and, thereafter, for the Council to convene a further EOGM on the issue.
The meeting ended past dinner time, with some members remarking that this was a satisfactory resolution to the EOGM, with the requisitionists achieving some progress by pushing the issue to the fore and by invoking a serious study by the said Committees, the Council and the members; while the 'traditionalists' achieved a solution which called for a serious and deeper study of the issues and consequences before a big step is taken.
 |
The AGM - always a good time to ply the Law Society's wares |
| The democratic process at work during the EOGM |  |
 |
Eager members registering for the EOGM |
| Mr David Nayar briefing members on the amended Welfare Fund Rules of the Social & Welfare Committee |  |
Naresh Mahtani
Law Society of Singapore
A seminar jointly organised by the Law Society of Singapore, the Football Association of Singapore and the Singapore Sports Council.
|
|
The recent General Association of International Sports Federations ('GAISF') Conference, held in Singapore in the last week of October 2001, gave Mr Palakrishnan, SC, President of the Law Society of Singapore, the idea for a sports law seminar specific to Singapore to be held in Singapore for the benefit of lawyers and sporting bodies.
As a result, the Law Society in conjunction with Townleys (UK sports lawyers), the Football Association of Singapore ('FAS') and the Singapore Sports Council, ran a seminar entitled, 'The Business of Sport - Legal and Commercial Issues' on the weekend of 27 and 28 October 2001. The seminar proved very popular with both the legal profession and sporting bodies and attracted a wide range of participants from those areas. Speakers included well-known overseas persons, such as Brian Phillpotts, Director of Commercial Enterprises (England's FA Premier League), Stephen Townley (Head of Sports with Hammond Suddards Edge, UK sports law specialists) and local speakers including Geraldine Lim (General Legal Counsel, Asia Pacific Breweries Singapore) and Mark O'Keefe (General Manager, SiS Asia).
The issues covered many areas of topical interest in Singapore, such as the role of the rights holder, key contracts, agent and broker arrangements, broadcasting and new media opportunities in sport, internet/online gaming, participation agreements, regulatory and commercial requirements, sponsorship, licensing and merchandising, franchising and many more, including governance of regulatory and commercial matters in sport.
The seminar represented a landmark in both the legal and sporting industries in Singapore. It was the first seminar of its kind to be held in all of Southeast Asia and was also the first event to bring together the FAS, the Singapore Sports Council and the Law Society of Singapore to address issues common to all.
As summed up by Mr Palakrishnan in his welcoming address: 'Singapore's sports industry is still in its infancy. As a result, local sport practitioners and lawyers alike are generally not aware of the potential which exists in this industry. Through this seminar, we aim to give everyone here a general understanding of how sport and law interact, and especially how the input of each enhances the value of the other'.
The aim of the seminar was to give a broad perspective of the issues and challenges facing all who, in one way or another, are involved in Singapore's growing sports industry. The objective was to provide lawyers and laymen alike with a 'beginners' guide' to the Business and Law of Sport.
In Europe and the US, the sport industries have seen this commercial potential in sport and sport-related activities (not just sport per se, but big business spin-offs, such as clothing, sponsorship and franchising) and are exercising that potential to its fullest. Given that New Zealand and Australia are in the process of developing their potential, the Law Society views this as an opportunity for Singapore lawyers and the sports industry as a whole to develop their own potential in the area of sports law and lead Asia into the future. The development of a professional sports industry in Singapore will not only benefit those directly involved in sports, but also lawyers involved in complex legal issues which are invariably raised in the area of sports law.
From the feedback given by participants, there is most definitely a place for sports lawyers in Singapore. For those interested in finding out more about the seminar or sports law in general, please contact either Mr Palakrishnan or Mr Monty Choy, Sports Committee, Law Society of Singapore.
Monique Ciochetto
Law Society of Singapore
The Law Society was a hive of activity on Election Day, 30 October 2001. Almost 2,000 members of the Society trooped down to 39 South Bridge Road to cast their votes to elect members into the Council for the Middle and Senior Categories.
It was an exciting time for everyone involved. Secretariat staff finally got to put a face to the names of members that they often communicate with but never get to meet. For some members who came to cast their votes, it was their first ever visit to the Law Society's premises, so they took in a tour as well. This was also a good opportunity to bump into former classmates and friends and catch up with news, as was evidenced by frequent squeals of 'How are you? Haven't seen you for the longest time!' The atmosphere was lively and the air of camaraderie unmistakable.
The terms of the following Council Members will expire on 31 December 2001:
Four candidates were nominated for three positions in the Senior Category. They were: Mrs Arfat Selvam, Mr Bala Chandran s/o A Kandiah, Mr Philip Jeyaretnam and Mr Murugaiyan Sivakumar.
The Middle Category saw six candidates vying for three positions. They were Mr Ong Ying Ping, Mr Suresh Damodara, Mr Manimaran s/o Arumugam, Mr Leo Cheng Suan, Mr David Nayar and Mr Thio Shen Yi.
For the Junior Category, the sole candidate, Mr Chia Boon Teck, was deemed elected under s 53(3) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161).
At 6.15pm, a last voter was cheered on when he made a mad dash through the doors of the Law Society and managed to escape the penalty of $500. The Secretariat staff then got down to work sorting and counting the votes. Finally, at 7.30pm, the Returning Officer, Mr Naresh Mahtani, announced that the following have been elected as Members of the Council of the Law Society with effect from 1 January 2002: Mrs Arfat Selvam, Mr Bala Chandran s/o A Kandiah, Mr Philip Jeyaretnam, Mr Ong Ying Ping, Mr Suresh Damodara and Mr Leo Cheng Suan.
The Council, with effect from 1 January 2002, will therefore comprise: Mrs Arfat Selvam, Mr Goh Phai Cheng, SC (Statutory Member), Mrs Murgiana Haq, Mr Gan Hiang Chye, Mr Palakrishnan, SC, Mr Bala Chandran s/o A Kandiah, Mr Ronnie Quek Cheng Chye (Statutory Member), Mr VK Rajah, SC (Statutory Member), Mr Philip Jeyaretnam, Mr Patrick Ang Peng Koon, Mr Ong Ying Ping, Mr Suresh Damodara, Mr Leo Cheng Suan, Ms Malathi Das, Mr Chia Boon Teck, Mr Leonard Loo Peng Chee and Mr Montague Choy Wing Kin.
 |
Right: Members queue up to register and get their voting slips |
| Left: The tension mounts as counting begins |  |
 |
Right: Mr Ong Ying Ping (standing, extreme left) looks on at the counting process |
| 39 South Bridge Road spills over with members coming to vote |  |
 |
He looks anxiously at his watch. Can he make it? |
| Yes, he can! The triumphant last voter, Mr Yeow Chee Beng |  |
 |
Ballot boxes are unlocked in the presence of our scrutineer, Mr Zaheer Merchant |
Congratulations!
Sharmaine Lau
Law Society of Singapore
 |
Golfers in action |
| Mr Wee Pan Lee, Chariman of CLAS committee, presenting a token of appreciation to Prof Jayakumar |  |
 |
JC Lee Sieu Kin presenting a prize to a 'C' division participant |
| Secretariat staff and the organising committee |  |
Pursuant to s 4(c) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161, 2000 Rev Ed), the Board of Legal Education issues the following Guidelines to assist Pupil Masters on the instruction to be given to pupils:
| Name of Pupil | |
| Name of Pupil Master |
Guidance Notes
Check lists are intended to guide Pupil Masters in planning the training and
instruction of their pupils during pupillage. This check list is prepared by the
Board of Legal Education to assist Pupil Masters to meet their professional
obligations to their pupils.
At the beginning of pupillage, Pupil Masters should discuss the check list with their pupils to determine which sections of the check list are appropriate for their pupils.
Part One of the check list covers basic matters of professional conduct and etiquette that every pupil is expected to receive instruction in.
Part Two of the check list aims to cover all aspects of an ideal pupillage. However, it is recognised that pupillage instruction is subject to the vagaries of practice of the individual Pupil Master and other members of the firm who may be given a role to provide training and instruction which the Pupil Master is not able to personally provide.
Pupils on their part should discuss with their Pupil Masters how to gain an understanding of those areas of practice that have not been covered and identify them and the proposed course of action in Part Three of this document.
Part Three requires pupils to set out training and instruction on any other matter covered in Parts One and Two and to provide feedback on their pupillage experiences. Such feedback may assist Pupil Masters to provide better pupillage training and instruction in future.
Firms may draw up their own check lists for approval by the Board at least one month before the proposed date of implementation.
Part One
| 1. | Conduct and Etiquette | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 1.1 | Read the Professional Conduct Rules | |||
| 1.2 | Discuss with your Pupil Master the following matters relating to conduct: | |||
| 1.2.1 | Conduct in court towards the Tribunal, court staff, client, witnesses, opponents and other parties | |||
| 1.2.2 | Conduct in negotiations and advising on settlements | |||
| 1.2.3 | Conduct in conferences | |||
| 1.2.4 | Duty to client; how to handle conflicts of duty and interest between yourself and your client, and between lay clients for whom you are jointly asked to act; what to do if two hearing dates clash | |||
| 1.2.5 | Relations with fellow solicitors; what to do if a solicitor withdraws and exercises a lien over the papers | |||
| 1.2.6 | Confidentiality and accidentally obtaining confidential information belonging to other parties | |||
| 1.2.7 | What to do if it is suggested that you have been negligent; what to do if asked to provide a witness statement | |||
| 1.2.8 | Costs orders | |||
| 1.3. | Discuss with your Pupil Master the following matters of etiquette: | |||
| 1.3.1 | Attire | |||
| 1.3.2 | Modes of Address | |||
| 1.3.3 | What to do if you are late for court or a conference | |||
| 1.3.4 | Use of affidavits in court - when to read |
Part Two
| 1. | Tribunals to be observed | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 1.1 | Trial in High Court | |||
| 1.2 | Hearing in Court of Appeal | |||
| 1.3 | Summons in chambers before registrar/judge in chambers | |||
| 1.4 | Pre-trial conference | |||
| 1.5 | Mediation | |||
| 1.6 | Motion court (Fridays) | |||
| 1.7 | Arbitration | |||
| 1.8 | Court of Appeal | |||
| 2. | Litigation - Advocacy | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 2.1 | A commercial action or an arbitration including examination in chief and cross-examination of witnesses of fact and opinion | |||
| 2.2. | An undefended application and a defended application for: | |||
| 2.2.1 | An interlocutory injunction | |||
| 2.2.2 | A Mareva injunction | |||
| 2.2.3 | An Anton Pillar order | |||
| 2.2.4 | An Ex parte application with and without notice to the other party (discuss the giving of undertakings) | |||
| 2.2.5 | Summary judgment application | |||
| 2.2.6 | Other interlocutory applications | |||
| 2.3 | Criminal trials | |||
| 3. | Litigation - Drafting | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 3.1. | Pleadings | |||
| 3.1.1 | Writs | |||
| 3.1.2. | Statement of claim | |||
| 3.1.2.1 | Contract | |||
| 3.1.2.2 | Tort | |||
| 3.1.3. | Defence | |||
| 3.1.3.1 | Contract | |||
| 3.1.3.2 | Tort | |||
| 3.1.4. | Counter claim | |||
| 3.1.4.1 | Contract | |||
| 3.1.4.2 | Tort | |||
| 3.1.5. | Reply | |||
| 3.1.5.1 | Contract | |||
| 3.1.5.2 | Tort | |||
| 3.1.6 | Third party proceedings | |||
| 3.1.7 | Originating summons | |||
| 3.1.8 | Request for further and better particulars | |||
| 3.1.9 | Further and better particulars | |||
| 3.1.10 | Interrogatories | |||
| 3.1.11 | Request for further argument | |||
| 3.1.12 | Notice and grounds of appeal | |||
| 3.1.13 | Draft order | |||
| 3.1.14 | Skeleton argument | |||
| 3.2. | Affidavits and summonses - Summons/notice of motion and affidavit for: | |||
| 3.2.1 | Summary judgment | |||
| 3.2.2 | Interim payment | |||
| 3.3 | Judgment in default applications | |||
| 4. | Litigation - Others | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 4.1. | Drafting | |||
| 4.1.1 | Style | |||
| 4.1.2 | The proper use of precedents | |||
| 4.1.3 | Limitation periods and time bars | |||
| 4.2. | Law and procedure - Familiarise yourself with the following: | |||
| 4.2.1 | Law relating to jurisdiction | |||
| 4.2.2 | Law relating to arbitration | |||
| 4.2.3 | The Rules of Court | |||
| 4.2.4 | Admiralty court procedures | |||
| 5. | Corporate | Done | Date | Copy or notes filed |
| 5.1 | Understanding precedents/documents & use of templates | |||
| 5.2 | Understanding the client's objectives | |||
| 5.3 | Sale & purchase of shares | |||
| 5.4 | Sale & purchase of business | |||
| 5.5 | Joint venture agreements/shareholder agreements | |||
| 5.6 | Conducting due diligence | |||
| 5.7 | Corporate establishment and resolutions | |||
| 5.8 | Employment/service agreements | |||
| 5.9 | Agency and distributorship agreements | |||
| 5.10 | Writing legal opinions | |||
| 5.11 | Charges and other security documents | |||
| 5.12 | Warranties | |||
| 5.13 | Boiler plate clauses | |||
| 5.14 | Understanding of key corporate issues including setting up business ventures and incorporation | |||
Part Three
1. Omissions
| Items Not Covered During Pupillage | Proposed Action |
2. Feedback from pupils
Firms and Pupil Masters welcome constructive comments about pupillage as such comments enable them to make improvements to the training that they offer.
| Matter for Comment | Comment |
|
Introduction to firm and the pupillage programme Continuing education offered by firm |
|
|
Advocacy: Substantive law: |
|
|
Opportunities to discuss work done Instruction in professional conduct and etiquette |
|
| Any other matters |
3. Declaration
I certify that I have completed the items set out in Parts One and Two of this check list (except those listed in Part Three, section 1. above) to the best of my ability. In respect of the items not covered, I undertake to complete the proposed work as soon as possible.
Signed: …………………… (Pupil)
Date:
I have read the check list and discussed it with the above pupil. In respect of the items listed in Part Three, section 1. above, I agree that the proposed action is appropriate.
Signed: .........................… (Pupil Master)
Date:
