HARRIET EDUCATIONAL GROUP THREATENS SGFORUMS WITH DEFAMATION
-
Wong Partnership LLP is a very large and well-known legal firm in Singapore.
It has many prominent lawyers and senior lawyers.
The law society link about Wong Partnership LLP
http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/directory/advertisers/corporate_commercial/wongpartnership_LLP.aspx
-
In 2005, there was another legal case against sgforums.com.
The url link is http://sgforums.com/forums/8/topics/151663
-
Originally posted by Lee012lee:
Wong Partnership LLP is a very large and well-known legal firm in Singapore.
It has many prominent lawyers and senior lawyers.
The law society link about Wong Partnership LLP
http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/directory/advertisers/corporate_commercial/wongpartnership_LLP.aspx
but they are like a bunch of retards.
They should sue harriet and they themself for making themself look so retarded!
-
Originally posted by Lee012lee:
In 2005, there was another legal case against sgforums.com.
The url link is http://sgforums.com/forums/8/topics/151663
That was against sister site sggirls. Apparently some users had been stealing pix and reposting them, AFAIK. -
Law Society of Singapore Island refuses to disclose the number of lawyers!
Ladies and Gentlemen,
A couple of years ago, it was reported in the Singapore press that the number of lawyers there with an island population of 4.5 million was no more than 3,500! Even with this small number, what was alarming was the number of lawyers there was shrinking with time, not increasing! In fact, the report said, 10 years ago there were more lawyers than what they had in 2007.
The number of 2500 now, guessing the shrinkage, is obviously inadequate for a country with a population of 4.5 million and claiming to be a financial hub! The principle reason is ( as any Singapore watcher will agree) the lack of human rights in the island; the erosion of the rule of law by Lee Kuan Yew, the dictator, interfering in the administration of justice and using it as a political tool to destroy his opponents.
Wanting to know what the number of lawyers in Singapore were now, I sent an Email to the Law society of Singapore. They have refused to answer. My guess, as anyone's guess would be, is this. The number of lawyers have shrunk even further and it would embarrass the Law Society to reveal the number. So they keep quite. Appended below is the exchange of Emails.
Communication 1, Gopalan Nair to Law Society: Article on Singapore lawyers
Friday, June 26, 2009 6:50 AM
From: "Gopalan Nair"
Add sender to Contacts
To: [email protected]
Hello,
I am the author of Singapore Dissident, a political blog on Singapore. I am writing an article on Singapore lawyers. Kindly let me know how many lawyers have practicing certificates at the time of writing in Singapore.
Thank you.
Gopalan Nair
Communication 2, Law Society to Gopalan Nair Re: Article on Singapore lawyers
Our Ref: LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Friday, June 26, 2009 7:40 AM
From: "Shawn Toh"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Gopalan Nair"
Cc: "communications"
Dear Mr Nair,
I refer to your email dated 26 June 2009 appended below.
Statistics for the number of lawyer holding practising certificates as at September 2008 is published on our website at www.lawsociety.org.sg > About Us > General Statistics.
The exercise for applications for practising certificates for Practice Year commencing 1 April 2009 has just ended a few weeks ago and the Society is currently in the process of collating and preparing the relevant statistics. Updated statistics will be uploaded on the Law Society website when available.
Regards
Shawn Toh
Senior Assistant Director
Communications & Membership Interests
The Law Society of Singapore
39 South Bridge Road S(058673)
Tel: 6530 0238 Fax: 6533 5700
email: [email protected]
web site: www.lawsociety.org.sg
Supporting www.singaporelaw.sg
Communication 3, Gopalan Nair to Law Society: RE: Article on Singapore lawyers
Our Ref: LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Friday, June 26, 2009 5:07 PM
From: "Gopalan Nair"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Shawn Toh"
Hello Shawn Toh,
Thank you for your Email. However what you say is troubling. If the exercise for filing new practicing certificates ended on April 1, which is nearly 2 months since, are you still saying they are still trying to organize the figures? This is difficult to accept, especially since Singapore is always trying to show they work at lighting speed efficiency.
What appears from public discussion is that the lawyer population is not only shrinking, it has in fact got below the 2,000 mark! The perceived reason is political interference in the legal process and the weakening of the rule of law. I do not know if this figure of 2,000 is true, an amount totally insufficient for a country the population size and business nature of Singapore.
What I suspect is that this is indeed the case, and you are trying to conceal this fact to avoid embarrassment.
I would be grateful if you answer this in the interests of not only of the Singapore public but also any outsider who may want to have anything to do with your legal system or country.
To be fair to you, I will be publishing this correspondence and your reply or the absence of it in the Singapore Dissident, my blog.
Thank you very much.
Gopalan Nair
Communication 4, Law Society to Gopalan Nair: RE: Article on Singapore lawyers
(Our Ref: LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Monday, June 29, 2009 5:50 AM
From: "Shawn Toh"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Gopalan Nair"
Cc: "communications" Dear Mr Nair,
I refer to your further email of 27 June 2009 appended below.
The annual practising certificates renewal exercise ended on 30 April 2009 and not on 1 April 2009 as you have stated.
The Law Society only publishes the statistics once a year around the period of August/September every year together with its Annual Report. You may therefore wish to look out for the next update on our Law Society's website which is scheduled to be in September 2009.
Regards
Shawn Toh
Senior Assistant Director
Communications & Membership Interests
The Law Society of Singapore
39 South Bridge Road S(058673)
Tel: 6530 0238 Fax: 6533 5700
email: [email protected]
web site: www.lawsociety.org.sg
Supporting www.singaporelaw.sg
Communication 5, Gopalan Nair to Law Society: RE: Article on Singapore lawyers
Our Ref: (LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Monday, June 29, 2009 6:59 AM
From: "Gopalan Nair"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Shawn Toh"
Hello Shawn Toh,
Thank you for your response, which I honestly did not expect. Your response is troubling. Am I taken to understand that the practicing certificate exercise ended on April 30, 2009. That your organization publishes the statistics once a year, that is in August/ September 2009. Therefore between the period April 30, 2009 to August/ September 2009, a period of at least 3 months, you or no one in your organization knows how many lawyers have practicing certificates! That you must wait until August/ September, a period of 3 months, before you or anyone else can know how many lawyers practice in Singapore! I understand, and I am sure you agree that Singapore does not have more than 3,000 lawyers or so, by the count last year! And all this difficulty that you have is just for this small number.
And I must go away and wait for August/ September 2009 to get this figure and in the meantime, my article on the declining legal profession in Singapore has to wait.
Am I am right in saying this? I understand Singapore is unique, and you are effectively proving it once again.
Will you surprise me again and respond to this? Thank you.
Gopalan Nair
Communication 6, Gopalan Nair to Law Society: RE: Article on Singapore lawyers
Our Ref: LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 8:49 PM
From: "Gopalan Nair"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Shawn Toh"
Please let me know if that is the end of the correspondence. I intend to write the blog on this now. Thanks
Communication 7, Law Society to Gopalan Nair: RE: Article on Singapore lawyers
Our Ref: LS/3/GEN.pq(06-70)/09-11/ST)
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 12:53 AM
From: "Shawn Toh"
Add sender to Contacts
To: "Gopalan Nair"
Cc: "communications" Dear Mr Nair,
Thank you for your email.
The Law Society has nothing further to add. The statistics on the Singapore’s legal profession will be updated on our website in September 2009 as scheduled.
Regards
Shawn Toh
Senior Assistant Director
Communications & Membership Interests
The Law Society of Singapore
39 South Bridge Road S(058673)
Tel: 6530 0238 Fax: 6533 5700
email: [email protected]
web site: www.lawsociety.org.sg
Supporting www.singaporelaw.sg
From the above correspondence either the Law Society of Singapore does not know how many lawyers practice law there or the number is so low, they are embarrassed to tell you. You may decide which is true!
Gopalan Nair -
And here comes Ah Chia telling everyone that everything is LKY's fault
-
I think by sending you the letter, they just have made it worse for themselves.
-
Cheers and we look forward to your Forum Favourites selections!
[url=http://pret-auto.org][color=#FFFFFF][u]pret auto[/u][/color][/url] -
Originally posted by Susanpret88:
Cheers and we look forward to your Forum Favourites selections!
[url=http://pret-auto.org][color=#FFFFFF][u]pret auto[/u][/color][/url]Sorry but I dun get what you mean by that.
-
So now they still preparing to sue ....?
-
Originally posted by Danny245514809:
www.gamebank.biz ,it is a professional, loyal and reliable work group game , which has been created for years,provides GW,EVE,RS , WOW and so on . We have the best and securest way to power level your character to your desired high levelfast. We have an outstanding world of powerleveling experience.
We are sure that you can't get such an outstanding WOW,GW,RS service the same as we do. We are sure that you will get a satisfaction with our outstanding service. Dont be irresolute .Just come to our website www.gamebank.biz and place your order for WOW,GW,RS then you will get your character to your desired
high level fast. We are ready to help you to have a wonderful life.www.gamebank.biz ,it is a professional,loyal and reliable work group game , which has been created for years,provides GW,EVE,RS , WOW and so on . once you sign up in our website we will send you $1 Gift
Certificate for your registration at GameBank immediately.are you stil hesitate ?just try ,you will get lots wonderfull then .
you can get everything you want in our website ,CHEAP! SAFE! AND FAST! 10min deliveryfor more detail ,plz click the link:http://www.gamebank.biz/
Whoa~... U must be damn stupid to advertise here...
/me paging for FireIce~...
-
Sgforum should consider countersue for uneccesary harassing and waste of justice system resources
I can imagine alot of witness for sgforums. Lol.
The above is meant to be a entertainment comment, not a legal or serious advice, please don't sue me . HARRIET EDUCATIONAL
-
Originally posted by limpshaggy:
Sgforum should consider countersue for uneccesary harassing and waste of justice system resources
I can imagine alot of witness for sgforums. Lol.
The above is meant to be a entertainment comment, not a legal or serious advice, please don't sue me . HARRIET EDUCATIONAL
Fanning the fire is easy. Are you going to foot the legal bills for Jason ?
Whether win or lose the case , Jason will have to spend a huge sum of money just on legal bills.
How much are you going to contribute to the legal fees huh ?
My belief is that Jason will not want to pursue the matter further unless if Harriet Educational decides to sue Jason lah.
-
Jason boh update the latest news?
-
youyayu not footing meh...why jason nia
-
hey any of you guys know where i can find a local business forum? with topics such as how to start a business and like-minded people who are interested in starting or have already started their business?
Thanks!! =)
-
Originally posted by curiousquestions:
hey any of you guys know where i can find a local business forum? with topics such as how to start a business and like-minded people who are interested in starting or have already started their business?
Thanks!! =)
Not here
-
Originally posted by curiousquestions:
hey any of you guys know where i can find a local business forum? with topics such as how to start a business and like-minded people who are interested in starting or have already started their business?
Thanks!! =)
Wrong phorum.
-
haha i know not here but i don't know where to find.. any suggestions?
-
So any latest feedback or update ?
-
Originally posted by Lindapret88:
Hello everyone. Nice to meet you all.
[url=http://pret-auto.org][color=#FFFFFF][u]taux pret auto[/u][/color][/url]Wrong phorum.
And Definitely wrong thread -
Originally posted by TWE:
So any latest feedback or update ?
you seriously think there will be.
they basically just want to scare people only.
they also have no grounds to take legal action.
as freedom of speech goes, posts are basically opinions about what the user has heard or what he she think and wishes to express to the community online as a whole. these may not be deemed true and are therefore not considered defamatory.
waste time la. got any got photo of the loser CEO? we should start a mas selamat poster of the guy?
-
Originally posted by Cocowang:
I am coco from consava com, our company engaging in slimming pills,slimming tea&coffee,beauty equipments,health care(face care,foot care,skin care,etc),vatamin,sex products etc. referring to beauty&healthy products.
Our advantages:
1,wholesale advantages
we could offer you more competitive price comparing market price for the same product;
we have many favourates for our wholesale customers such as shipment free,more dicscount etc.;
wholesale customer customer could enjoy our company VIP service.
2,payment advantages
Our company have online shopping department, we could offer you online payment thought paypal at our online shop;
30 days money back guarantee;
3,custom-built service
We could offer our customer OEM service only tell us referring products detail.futher information kindly pls have a visit our web site:www.consava.com
apprecite if we could make further talking.
Best wishes
coco wang
Sales director
Direct: 0086-020-81028754
Cell phone:0086-13590364652
Msn:[email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Skype:consava2007
Website:www.consava.comYou will so phail~... BB to u in advance~
-
Originally posted by Kellylove407:
wahaha.... scams caught up in this sticky...
-
If the original posts contain truth, then no need to worry. The original posters have the defence of justification, i.e. speaking the truth. Defences
Whenever you publish anything which might be considered to be defamatory you should consider whether you can establish one of the defences below. Keep the evidence on which you have based your decision for a minimum of 18 months including all drafts of the article, statements, tape recordings and notebooks. A claimant must commence a defamation action within one year of publication of the defamatory statement(s) which runs afresh on each repetition of the publication.
1. Justification
Justification means simply the truth - the defamatory statement is true or substantially true. Justification is both the best and worst defence. It is best because if it succeeds it is an absolute defence regardless of the reason for publication.
It is irrelevant whether or not publication of the material was a breach of privacy or confidence or that it was offensive to the claimant. It is the worst defence because the defamatory statement is presumed to be untrue and the onus is on the defendant to prove the contrary.
2. Fair comment
The defence of fair comment on a matter of public interest is designed to preserve the fundamental rights of freedom of speech and expression. In a democratic society everyone is entitled to express genuinely held opinions on matters of public interest however strong or prejudiced those views may be.
The defendant must overcome four hurdles to establish this defence:
* the statement must be comment (ie opinion) and not a statement of fact;
* the comment must have a sufficient factual basis (that is the comment must be based on facts which are themselves true);
* the comment must be one that a "fair minded" man could honestly hold;
* the subject matter of the comment must be a matter of public interest.
3. Privilege
Privilege is category of defence where the law recognises that it is better that individuals are free to speak their mind (and others to report what they say) without fear of being sued for defamation even if they get it wrong and the claimant's reputation is damaged. Privilege may be absolute or qualified.
* Absolute privilege
Absolute privilege is a complete defence and cannot be defeated even if the claimant proves that the defendant published the words maliciously (unlike qualified privilege). Statements made in judicial or quasi judicial proceedings and statements made in parliamentary proceedings are absolutely privileged.
* Qualified privilege
Qualified privilege will be a defence where the public interest in allowing publication outweighs the claimant's interest in protecting his reputation, unless the claimant proves malice on the part of the defendant. Statements or publications protected by qualified privilege can broadly be divided into two categories:
o statements made by a person who has a duty, to make the statement or an interest in making the statement to a recipient or recipients having a duty or interest in receiving it; and
o fair and accurate reports of certain proceedings, documents and statements.
* Secondary responsibility
The term 'publisher' includes distributors and printers. Although section 1 of the Defamation Act 1996 protects those who have only secondary responsibility they must demonstrate that they have taken sufficient care to rely on the defence, ie that:
o he is not the author, editor or publisher of the statement complained of, or
o he is only involved in providing a system or service by means of which the statement is retrieved, copied, distributed or made available in electronic form. This is the defence that an internet service provider (or a chat room or message board provider) will seek to rely on if he 'innocently' publishes defamatory material. However it is essential for the provider to show that he has taken reasonable care and takes prompt action, if necessary;
o he took reasonable care in relation to its publication and
o he did not know and had no reason to believe that what he did caused or contributed to the publication of the defamatory statement.