Lawyers to get booted in JonLock case

[Apollo]

A simple case that erupts into a 'frolic by solicitors' School teacher Jonathan Lock, already saddled with legal bills of over $100,000, takes his case to the Appeals Court. By Selina Lum

 

A SIMPLE traffic accident case landed in the highest court in Singapore - all because of a dispute over $60.

 

The much-publicised case of primary school teacher Jonathan Lock, who was initially awarded $188 by the Primary Dispute Resolution Centre (PDRC) but ended up being saddled with legal bills of more than $100,000, was heard before a three-judge Court of Appeal on Tuesday.

 

Mr Lock was unwittingly dragged into a long and costly court battle after his former lawyer issued a writ of seizure against NTUC Income. The insurance giant responded by appealing to the High Court. NTUC's lawyers argued that the PDRC was not a court of law, and, hence, had no authority to make enforcible orders.

 

The PDRC was set up by the Subordinate Courts to deal with minor road accidents and mediation sessions are presided over by district judges wearing hats as mediators.

 

During the hearing of Mr Lock's appeal case on Tuesday, one of the three judges, Judge of Appeal V. K. Rajah said that in appealing to the High Court on a point of law, NTUC's lawyers had 'used a sledgehammer to crack a peanut, when a nutcracker would do'.

 

Without mincing his words, Justice Rajah added: 'This is a very simple case. Why has it conflagrated into a frolic by solicitors?'

 

Mr Lock's new lawyer, Mr Joseph Chen, argued that the PDRC was indeed a court, but Mr Madan Asomull, lawyer for Ms Jessiline Goh, whose car collided with Mr Lock's motorcyle sparking off the long-drawn legal battle, supported the High Court decision.

 

However, the judges lobbed many questions at Mr Asomull, pointing out that the PDRC was set up to save time and costs for insurers and the public.

 

They pointed out that Mr Asomull was actually arguing to make the process more lengthy and costly. This is because following the High Court decision, all settlements reached through the PDRC had to be endorsed by another judge.

 

The Court will give its decision on Wednesday.

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/Latest%2BNews/...ory_163359.html

 

look like ms Jessiline Goh or her lawyer is gg to get it.

[Altivo]

these lawyers are really wasting time...

[Fondue]

PLEASE .... let justice prevail

[Nothingtodo]

This case is a big joke. Both to the insurance company, and to our law society.

 

I am glad this guy rejected NTUC offer to settle his "fees".

[Sosaria]

The article says "...However, the judges lobbed many questions at Mr Asomull, pointing out that the PDRC was set up to save time and costs for insurers and the public.

 

They pointed out that Mr Asomull was actually arguing to make the process more lengthy and costly. This is because following the High Court decision, all settlements reached through the PDRC had to be endorsed by another judge. ..."

 

Then, if the intention was clear all along that the PDRC is to simplify procedures, why did the high court make such a decision earlier

 

IMHO, this so-called "frolic by solicitors" could've been stopped earlier at the high court.

[Symantec9]

remind of the case in US about "someone" tried suing the pants Off Dry Cleaners...where 'people' had been mis-guided & blow-up the whole issue big big...so sad

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/13/us/13pan...r=1&oref=slogin

[Relagsingh]

most of the time its the blood sucking lawyers who tries to be funny.

[Aimnfire]

well....top 3 blood suckerz are and it is not in order of merit

 

lawyer/insurance co/banks

[Apollo]

only the high court judge can answer tat herself.

[Jonbummer]

interesting case it unfolds more and more

 

just hope the innocent is not been punished, that all.

and to thoes who like to re-invent the wheel be flocked

[Nolicense]

looks like this case shows not only the lawyer should be shot, the high court judge also should be shot. don't even know the law. have to wonder how qualified judges in sg really are.

[Route88]

look like ms Jessiline Goh or her lawyer is gg to get it.

 

I do hope both get

Wanna act smart right...

[Spurman]

180 turns 100k..

 

Makes us thinks most lawyers are suckers

[Nolicense]

correction! lawyers are "blood suckers".

and they treat people like suckers.

[Apollo]

hopefully both the judge and lawyer get to face the disciplinary comm in law society!

[Nolicense]

you're kidding.. this is sg.. mutual back skretching

[Jman888]

http://news.asiaone.com/News/The%2BStraits...1003-28214.html

 

final comment:

"Justice Rajah said he was puzzled how such a ruling would benefit NTUC Income as it meant more costs and inconvenience for insurers, lawyers and the public.

 

Mr Asomull said he was arguing it as a matter of law.

 

But Justice Phang noted that the law is not only about logic and technicality but also about justice and common sense."

[Altivo]

looks like the lawyer got pwned!!!

 

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cna/20071003/tap-...90-231650b.html

 

SINGAPORE: Primary school teacher Jonathan Lock has won his legal battle, when the Court of Appeal ruled in his favour.

 

Lock will not have to pay a single cent of the legal bills amounting to some S$120,000.

 

The Court of Appeal on Wednesday ordered all the different parties to bear their own costs.

 

35