Lawyer Joseph Chen struck off the rolls for professional misconduct in migrant worker cases

The Court of Three Judges disbarred Joseph Chen on 25 November 2024 for professional misconduct in two workplace injury cases involving migrant workers.

Mr Chen’s actions included the unauthorised use of settlement funds and negligence, which led to a lawsuit’s automatic discontinuation.

This is not Mr Chen’s first disciplinary issue. In 2005, he was suspended for four years after lying to prison authorities. He was alleged to have falsely claimed to be a friend of an inmate and accompanied the inmate’s grandmother on a visit after his request for a professional interview was denied. However, the suspension was set aside due to technicalities, and he was subsequently acquitted.

In 2018, the Council of the Law Society reprimanded Mr Chen for unprofessional conduct. He had issued an invoice for S$35,000 to a client—significantly higher than the agreed fee of S$8,000—without first notifying the client of any change in circumstances.

In July 2022, the Court of Appeal ordered Mr Chen to pay S$3,000 in personal costs for unprofessional behaviour while representing Gaiyathiri Murugayan, a woman convicted of fatally abusing her domestic worker. The court stated that Mr Chen should have known his client’s appeal was bound to fail and criticised him for conduct falling below the standards expected of a defence lawyer.

The disbarment follows years of escalating scrutiny into Mr Chen’s professional conduct. His latest offences involved two workplace injury cases concerning Bangladeshi workers.

In one case, Mr Chen represented Mr Jony Advaita Sarkar, who was injured in 2016 while working for GSI Offshore. Mr Sarkar returned to Bangladesh in 2017, authorising Mr Chen to act on his behalf.

The case, filed in November 2017, was settled in 2018 for S$11,000. However, Mr Chen used part of the settlement funds to cover his firm’s expenses without consulting or informing his client.

When Mr Sarkar discovered the settlement terms in November 2020, he lodged a complaint with the Law Society. A disciplinary tribunal, appointed in May 2022, found Mr Chen guilty of misconduct, including failing to seek his client’s consent and misusing settlement funds.

The second case involved Mr Masud Rana Abdul Jalil Hawlader, a Bangladeshi migrant worker whose personal injury case in 2012 was mishandled by Mr Chen.

After taking no steps in the case for nearly a year, the lawsuit was deemed discontinued in 2016.

Mr Masud only discovered the lapse upon returning to Singapore in 2018 and filed a complaint with the assistance of Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2), an advocacy group for migrant workers.

The Law Society initially sought “watered-down” charges against Mr Chen in Mr Masud’s case, leading a 2020 disciplinary tribunal to reject the plea agreement. The tribunal noted that the charges failed to reflect the seriousness of Mr Masud’s complaints.

The tribunal found it “troubling” that, despite documentary evidence indicating the need for more serious charges to be examined, the parties entered into a plea bargaining agreement that resulted in the removal of the more serious charges and the dilution of the remaining charge.

In August 2022, the High Court ruled in favour of Mr Masud’s judicial review application, quashing the Law Society’s decision to pursue the watered-down charges.

Justice Valerie Thean ordered the Law Society to apply to the Chief Justice for further directions, including the potential appointment of a new tribunal.

This was followed by a judicial review judgment in January 2023, where Justice Thean annulled the findings of the earlier tribunal and directed the formation of a new tribunal to reinvestigate the matter.

The reconstituted tribunal found Mr Chen guilty of negligence, failure to act with diligence, and poor supervision of his staff. It also rejected his argument that he owed no duty to Mr Masud, affirming that a solicitor-client relationship existed regardless of the claim’s merits.

These findings were pivotal to the Court of Three Judges’ decision to strike Mr Chen off the rolls. Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who presided over the case, stressed that Mr Chen’s actions represented a “complete dereliction of duty” to his clients.

The court will issue a detailed judgment at a later date.

In addition to the latest cases, Mr Chen has been alleged to have been linked to multiple Law Society complaints and legal disputes involving asylum seeker Charles Yeo. On Instagram, Mr Yeo alleged that some of these complaints were instigated by Mr Chen, although this claim remains unverified.

Mr Chen, who was called to the Bar in 1998, had been the sole proprietor of Joseph Chen & Co. His disbarment marks the culmination of a series of ethical breaches over his legal career.

Edit: Updated background of Mr Chen’s 2005 suspension