Findings and Determination

of the Disciplinary Committee

Pursuant to s 93(5) of the Legal Profession Act (Cap 161) (‘the Act’), the Council of the Law Society is required to publish the findings and determination of the Disciplinary Committee in The Singapore Law Gazette or in such other media as the Council may determine to adequately inform the public of the same. 

This summary is published pursuant to the requirements of section 93(5) of the Act.

 
In the Matter of Ong Ying Ping, an Advocate and Solicitor

1    The Disciplinary Committee (‘DC’) found Ong Ying Ping (the Respondent Solicitor) guilty of the charge and determined that cause of sufficient gravity existed for disciplinary action under section 83 of the Legal Profession Act .

2    On 27 May 2005, the Court of 3 Judges of the Supreme Court ordered that the Respondent Solicitor be suspended for two years (the suspension to take effect two weeks after the order). 

3    The Respondent Solicitor was charged with the following charge:

Charge

      That Ong Ying Ping is guilty of misconduct unbefitting an advocate and solicitor as an officer of the Supreme Court or as a member of an honourable profession within the meaning of section 83(b) or (h) of the Legal Profession Act (Chapter 161) in that he on 5 October 2001 at Queenstown Remand Prison did fail to disclose that one Tan Teck Cheng Linda is related to the prisoner he was interviewing Ivan Ng Chin Hoe and misled the prison officers to believe that she was his assistant. 

4    The DC heard the evidence of the Respondent Solicitor and prison officers.  The DC determined that the Respondent Solicitor had intentionally failed to disclose to the prison authorities that Ms Tan was the wife of the prisoner, with a view to misleading the prison officers into permitting her to attend the interview when she would not have been permitted to do so.

5    The DC concluded that the Respondent Solicitor’s conduct was unacceptable and fell below the required standards of integrity, probity and trustworthiness reasonably to be expected of an advocate and solicitor.