\n<\/p>\n
SINGAPORE \u2013 Fugitive lawyer Charles Yeo, who <\/p>\n fled Singapore in 2022<\/p>\n <\/a> while on bail for criminal charges, has been struck off the rolls. <\/p>\n The Law Society of Singapore had brought five sets of disciplinary proceedings against Yeo, who was admitted to the Bar in August 2016.<\/p>\n 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\u2019s due diligence failures.<\/p>\n The fourth concerned at least 185 breaches of rules governing how lawyers handle money, arising out of Yeo\u2019s mismanagement of clients\u2019 funds and financial records.<\/p>\n 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. <\/p>\n In a written judgment on Nov 28, the Court of Three Judges agreed with the Law Society that a striking-off was warranted.<\/p>\n \u201cBy 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,\u201d said the court.<\/p>\n 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. <\/p>\n The Law Society referred Yeo\u2019s case to the court after five disciplinary tribunals, each made up of members of the legal profession, found him guilty of professional misconduct.<\/p>\n Yeo\u2019s failings went far beyond one-off lapses, said the court.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n The court said the cumulative effect of all his ethical transgressions paints the picture of a legal practitioner who \u201cheld a cavalier disregard\u201d for the safeguards designed to protect clients who entrust lawyers with their money.<\/p>\n Yeo also failed to appreciate a lawyer\u2019s vital function to act with due diligence to safeguard clients\u2019 best interests.<\/p>\n He flouted a lawyer\u2019s most central duty of candour to the court, and consistently conducted himself on a public platform \u201cwith such an unbecoming comportment as to bring disrepute to the legal profession\u201d, the court added.<\/p>\n Yeo was arrested on Nov 4, 2024 by <\/p>\n authorities in the United Kingdom<\/p>\n <\/a> after Singapore sent a request in October 2023 seeking his extradition over\u00a0an offence of abetment of cheating.<\/p>\n The workplace injury incidents were in respect of three migrant workers from Bangladesh who initially hired another law firm to sue their employers.<\/p>\n The three had never communicated with Yeo or authorised him to act on their behalf.<\/p>\n Yeo relied on a man named Saha Ranjit Chandra\u00a0as the bridge of communication between himself and the workers.<\/p>\n Letters in which the workers purportedly discharged their previous lawyer and authorised Yeo to act for them were forged, though it is currently unclear who forged the documents. <\/p>\n Acting on unverified instructions, Yeo settled the workers\u2019 claims without their knowledge or authorisation, and disbursed the settlement sums to Ranjit.<\/p>\n Two of the workers received none of the respective settlement sums of $41,821.80 and $30,000.<\/p>\n Most of the money went to Ranjit, and the remainder went to Yeo\u2019s law firm Whitefield Law Corporation as legal costs. <\/p>\n The third worker realised that things were amiss and intervened. But $18,000 of $37,465.40 still ended up being paid to Ranjit, while the worker received only $9,707.25.<\/p>\n