PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Soh Chee Wen & Anor

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Soh Chee Wen & Anor

The court held that the Prosecution is entitled to assert litigation privilege in Singapore criminal proceedings; litigation privilege covers both oral and written communications made when litigation was reasonably in prospect and for the dominant purpose of litigation; privilege is subject to exceptions including implied waiver, the fraud exception and a necessity exception where the accused's need for the evidence and the probative value outweigh the interest in confidentiality; in evidential disputes the cross‑examination should focus first on facts in issue, the Prosecution must establish that claimed communications satisfy the conditions for litigation privilege, and the Defence may...

Citation
[2019] SGHC 235
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Soh Chee Wen; Accused: Quah Su-Ling
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
30 September 2019
Case Number
HC/CC 9/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interim Evidential Hearing During Trial (decision on Litigation Privilege and Witness Preparation)
Outcome
Prosecution entitled to assert litigation privilege but such privilege is limited by disclosure obligations and subject to exceptions (implied waiver, fraud/public‑policy, necessity); guidance given for trial handling of privilege objections
Legal Topics
Litigation Privilege, Legal Professional Privilege, Implied Waiver, Necessity Exception, Witness Interview/preparation, Public Interest Immunity, Disclosure Obligations
Source Language
English
Evidence Criminal Law Procedure Litigation Privilege Legal Professional Privilege Implied Waiver Necessity Exception Witness Interview/preparation +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Soh Chee Wen

Accused

Quah Su-Ling

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interim Evidential Hearing During Trial (decision on Litigation Privilege and Witness Preparation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Prosecution may assert litigation privilege in Singapore criminal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether litigation privilege covers communications between prosecutors/investigators and witnesses during preparation of conditioned statements
  3. 3 Whether oral communications are protected by litigation privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Prosecution is entitled to assert litigation privilege in Singapore criminal proceedings; litigation privilege covers both oral and written communications made when litigation was reasonably in prospect and for the dominant purpose of litigation; privilege is subject to exceptions including implied waiver, the fraud exception and a necessity exception where the accused's need for the evidence and the probative value outweigh the interest in confidentiality; in evidential disputes the cross‑examination should focus first on facts in issue, the Prosecution must establish that claimed communications satisfy the conditions for litigation privilege, and the Defence may...

Court Disposition

Prosecution entitled to assert litigation privilege but such privilege is limited by disclosure obligations and subject to exceptions (implied waiver, fraud/public‑policy, necessity); guidance given for trial handling of privilege objections

Orders

  • Cross‑examination to focus on facts in issue; questioning may probe why/how witness gave evidence and such factual probing is permissible even if it reveals that a communication occurred
  • If the Prosecution objects on litigation privilege it must establish the conditions for privilege in respect of the communications