Fugitive Charles Yeo struck off rolls; court finds him ‘thoroughly unfit’ to be a lawyer

Fugitive Charles Yeo struck off rolls; court finds him ‘thoroughly unfit’ to be a lawyer


SINGAPORE – Fugitive lawyer Charles Yeo, who

fled Singapore in 2022

while on bail for criminal charges, has been struck off the rolls.

The Law Society of Singapore had brought five sets of disciplinary proceedings against Yeo, who was admitted to the Bar in August 2016.

Three of the complaints were separately lodged by migrant workers after the settlement money for their workplace injuries was disbursed to a third party as a result of Yeo’s due diligence failures.

The fourth concerned at least 185 breaches of rules governing how lawyers handle money, arising out of Yeo’s mismanagement of clients’ funds and financial records.

The fifth related to misrepresentations he had made to the court while he was representing two death row inmates, as well as Instagram posts he uploaded attacking the legal system.

In a written judgment on Nov 28, the Court of Three Judges agreed with the Law Society that a striking-off was warranted.

“By the totality of the above, he has thereby shown himself to be thoroughly unfit to wear the mantle of membership in this venerable profession of law,” said the court.

The court, which has the power to disbar or suspend errant lawyers, comprised Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Justice Tay Yong Kwang and Justice Steven Chong.

The Law Society referred Yeo’s case to the court after five disciplinary tribunals, each made up of members of the legal profession, found him guilty of professional misconduct.

Yeo’s failings went far beyond one-off lapses, said the court.

The gross extent of his breaches, both in terms of the quantity of incidents and the quality of his misconduct, unequivocally signified his serious defects of character, it added.

The court said the cumulative effect of all his ethical transgressions paints the picture of a legal practitioner who “held a cavalier disregard” for the safeguards designed to protect clients who entrust lawyers with their money.

Yeo also failed to appreciate a lawyer’s vital function to act with due diligence to safeguard clients’ best interests.



Read Full Article At Source