Multi-Disciplinary Practices Dialogue Session | Swedish National Courts Administration Visit | Malaysia/Singapore Bench & Bar Games 2001

Multi-Disciplinary Practices Dialogue Session

(MDP Dialogue Session Panel) L-R: Mr Raymond Chan, Mr Derrick Wong, Mr Goh Phai Cheng SC, Mr Tan Tee Jim SC and Mr murugaiyan Sivakumar

Over the past ten years or so, all over the world, there has been a rapidly increasing realisation amongst professionals, mainly lawyers and accountants, as well as architects, engineers and quantity surveyors, and psychologists, counsellors and social workers, that they should be joining forces, sharing their experience and knowledge and working together to offer integrated services and advice to their clients.

Clients are also increasingly expecting more practical and holistic services from their lawyers, rather than mere legal research or advice (which is, to the resourceful consumer, quite readily available from books and the internet). Clients also like to work with lawyers who have a ready network of other professionals at their disposal.

Also, with more modern management, networking and marketing techniques, and the liberalising of publicity rules (or rather, the former 'restrictions'), law firms are better equipped to boast of being 'one-stop' centres for legal, business or counselling advice, as the case may be.

The different groups of professionals have also realised, some earlier than others, that there is tremendous potential in sharing profits with each other as partners in Multi-Disciplinary Practices ('MDPs').

However, professionals on the whole are still grappling with the questions and issues raised by MDPs, in particular, ethical rules and issues (concerning confidentiality, profit-sharing and publicity) and regulatory issues (such as insurance, and the purviews of the professional and licensing bodies over MDPs).

More specifically, for the legal profession in Singapore, as stated by the President of the Law Society, Mr Palakrishnan SC, in his speech at the Opening of the Legal Year on 6 January 2001, the subject of MDPs is a natural progression for the Law Society, after having in the recent past grappled with the advent of Group Law Practices, Law Corporations, Joint Law Ventures and Formal Law Alliances.

In October 1999, a Multi-Disciplinary Practices Committee of the Law Society, headed by Mr Goh Phai Cheng SC, issued its Report, which summarised the situation in the various jurisdictions and stated, amongst other things, that: in a 1999 survey amongst Law Society members in Singapore (which attracted only 13 responses, reflecting the profession's neutrality, perhaps), none of the responses were against the idea of MDPs in general. The Report also indicated that if lawyers are permitted to form MDPs, then safeguards should be introduced, in relation to the regulatory and ethical issues, 'to ensure the independence of the profession and to protect the interest of clients'.

Recently, the Chief Justice also sought the views of the Law Society, and released to the Law Society a preliminary report on the subject of MDPs prepared by the Justices' Law Clerks' Pool, which gave an update on developments in other jurisdictions and, amongst other things, encouraged the profession in Singapore to be 'deliberate and active in planning and strategising for the future to stay abreast with developments in our society'.

Towards this end, the Law Society recently distributed copies of the aforesaid Reports (and related background reading material) to all members. The MDPs Committee has also been renewed - its current members are Mr Goh Phai Cheng SC, Mr Raymond Chan, Mr Derrick Wong, Mr Tan Tee Jim SC, Mr M Sivakumar and Mr Yap Teong Liang. The MDPs Committee of the Society also organised a dialogue session with members on the evening of 20 February 2001.

The dialogue session attracted about 70 participants. To launch the dialogue, there were brief presentations by the panelists, namely, the aforesaid members of the MDPs Committee on the subject in general, the position in other jurisdictions, the kinds of MDP structures, pros and cons of MDPs and on ethical issues.

There were very substantive and well-thought out views presented by the said panellists and attendees.

Interestingly, a spontaneous straw poll conducted at the outset of the session indicated the following: 30 persons were 'for' MDPs, while 4 were 'not in favour' of MDPs. (The others abstained, or were unsure, perhaps).

The areas of interest, views and concerns expressed by members were:

• whether MDPs can still effectively have non-lawyers within them who remain employees (ie not profit-sharing partners);
• issues concerning confidentiality and 'chinese walls';
• MDPs between lawyers and accountants - some asked 'whether the accountants will take over?' Some felt, however, that in the areas of business law, lawyers were more adept at 'taking over';
• whether MDPs would restrict access to specialist expert evidence (as members of other disciplines would be tied-up and conflicted out by being part of legal MDPs);
• whether the professional code of conduct may be degenerated by MDPs - some felt that since, generally, there is no widespread objection to MDP structures, and it is a bit outdated to be objecting, we should make it clear that MDPs are 'allowed', and then make the necessary rules of conduct to facilitate and regulate, instead of being deterred by the problems from the outset and having the tail wag the dog;
• whether the profession is unnecessarily 'restricting' itself , by being concerned with the ethical issues;
• we should allow alternatives, ie allow MDPs and let lawyers and other professionals choose whether they would prefer to operate 'traditionally' or in MDPs;
• whether we should allow MDPs for 'all and sundry' or allow only certain types of MDPs;
• precedents in other countries - some were of the view that we should follow the schemes set up in New South Wales and other jurisidictions, instead of reinventing the wheel; other views were that what is happening in other jurisdictions is not applicable to us;
• whether only the bigger firms will benefit from MDPs;
• perhaps we should allow or facilitate 'Multi- Disciplinary Group Practices'.

The Council and the MDPs Committee has benefitted immensely from the indications given at the dialogue session and the feedback and knowledge presented by the participants.

Subsequently, the MDPs Committee will meet and carry out follow-ups, which include an updated Report for presentation to the Council and, subsequently, to members and the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General.

If there are any more views, or if members would like copies of the aforesaid background materials and reports, please feel free to send your requests or views to the Law Society (via the Secretariat Representative for the MDPs Committee, Mr Naresh Mahtani).

Naresh Mahtani
Chief Executive Officer, The Law Society of Singapore

Swedish National Courts Administration Visit

Swedish National Courts Administration representatives visited the Law Society on Thursday, 22 February 2001, at 2:30pm.

The Swedish delegation, led by Ms Marianne Hassel, Head of the IT Division of the National Courts Administration, met with Council members and members of our International Relations, Information Technology and Electronic Filing System committees.

Currently, the National Courts Administration is developing a new court management system for the flow of information both within the courts and throughout the entire justice system (including lawyers).

The Swedes hoped to find out more about the use of IT in the Singapore judicial system, in particular, our Electronic Filing System (EFS) and the Singapore practitioner's perspective of the EFS. Our guests noted the importance of constant consultation between all parties who are using the system (both before the implementation of the system as well as after the system becomes operational) for the successful operation of the system.

Adeline Ang
Director, Public Relations
The Law Society of Singapore

Malaysia/Singapore Bench & Bar Games 2001

The Law Society of Singapore shall be hosting the Bench & Bar Games 2001 in Singapore from Friday, 4 May 2001, to Sunday, 6 May 2001. The Organising Committee is chaired by Mr Godwin Campos and comprises more than 20 members in sub-committees and Convenors.

An estimated 250 participants are expected at the Bench & Bar Games this year, as Sabah and Sarawak will be joining in the Quadrangular Games. The response to the Games has been encouraging, with more than 100 members from Singapore indicating their interest in participating in the Games. The Games will end with the traditional gala dinner and dance.

Funded by donations from members and advertisements in the souvenir magazine, a higher budget is anticipated for this year's event to ensure that the Games are celebrated in a memorable way. For further inquiries and donation pledges, please contact Mr Abdul Rahim Kassim, Assistant Director, Professional Standards & Membership Services, at Tel No: 5300216. If you are interested in participating in the Games, kindly contact the relevant Convenors: