ST : Sale of house: Lawyers win appeal against PI

Jul 29, 2010

Sale of house: Lawyers win appeal against PI

Private eye had sued them over commission paid to property agency

By Selina Lum

A PRIVATE eye who initially won his case against four lawyers in the Subordinate Courts now has to return the $52,000 that had been paid to him, after the High Court overturned the lower court's decision.

The amount included the $24,000 legal costs he was awarded after he sued

Ms Amarjit Kour, Mr Gregory Tang, Ms Belinda Ang and Mr Peter Low.

Mr Simon Suppiah Sunmugam, 62, had sued them for wrongly paying out $28,000 as commission to property agency ERA from the sale of his matrimonial home in 2002.

In April, a district court said the money should not have been paid out as the agreement between Mr Suppiah's former wife and ERA was invalid.

But on Tuesday, High Court judge Kan Ting Chiu allowed an appeal by the four lawyers, represented by Senior Counsel Molly Lim, holding that they had not breached their duties. Mr Suppiah was also ordered to pay another $20,000 in costs.

The suit arose out of his divorce from Madam Nee Shyan Huey, 44, and the sale of their house in Punggol. Madam Nee signed an agreement with ERA to sell the house. The agency found a buyer who offered $1.6 million but Mr Suppiah rejected it and later, found someone who was willing to pay $1.75 million.

In 2002, he realised that $28,000 had been deducted from the sale proceeds for ERA's commission.

Six years later, he sued the four lawyers from the firm that acted for his wife, and his own divorce lawyer, Mr Andrew Hanam, alleging that they had been negligent in releasing the commission. Mr Hanam was cleared of any fault.

At the appeal, Justice Kan noted that Madam Nee, who has permission by the court to solely handle the sale, had to pay the commission and did not have to get Mr Suppiah's consent. The judge questioned how the lawyers, carrying out her instructions, could be held liable when, in a separate hearing, the High Court had ruled that Madam Nee need not refund Mr Suppiah.

Yesterday, Ms Ang told The Straits Times that the lawyers fought the case on principle, and had spent nearly four times the claim amount on legal fees. 'Even though we are covered by insurance, we had to clear our names,' she said.

selinal@sph.com.sg