Jump to content

High Court acquits maid of stealing S$34,000 worth of items from CAG chairman Liew Mun Leong’s home


Ysc3
 Share

Recommended Posts

In claim against AGC for compensation, Parti Liyani’s lawyer says prosecution made purposeless attacks on her

Quote

On Friday (April 16), lawyer Anil Balchandani said that these were all behaviours that show “improper motive” and are not befitting of the public prosecutor’s role as “ministers of justice”, when the prosecution should provide as much information as possible to assist the court to arrive at a correct decision — not to secure a conviction at all costs.

“They wanted the court to see only what they felt was desirable for their case,” he added.

Mr Balchandani was the defence lawyer for former domestic worker Parti Liyani, who was acquitted of stealing from the household of prominent businessman and former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong.

He is now representing Ms Parti, 46, to seek S$10,000 compensation from the prosecution and the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), in a first-of-its-kind application here. 
 


Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/claim-against-agc-for-compensation-parti-liyani-lawyer-says-prosecution-made-purposeless-attacks-on-her

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypersonic
14 minutes ago, Blueray said:

In claim against AGC for compensation, Parti Liyani’s lawyer says prosecution made purposeless attacks on her


Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/claim-against-agc-for-compensation-parti-liyani-lawyer-says-prosecution-made-purposeless-attacks-on-her

Only max $10k compensation. I thought false accusation is serious business that can sue until underwear drop.

  • Praise 1
  • Haha! 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2020 at 12:40 PM, Fcw75 said:

Some people can simply tell a lie without blinking. Have to give it to them.

Btw, isn’t there a conflict of interest when someone is both the law minister and home affairs minister?

Conflict of interest??? Where??? 🤣🤣

There was a time.. when a CNY reunion dinner table literally controlled ALL aspects of Singapore life. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vid said:

Only max $10k compensation. I thought false accusation is serious business that can sue until underwear drop.

Should be 130k at least for legal cost mah.... they say justice is blind.... not sure what they meant actually 😑

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Blueray said:

In claim against AGC for compensation, Parti Liyani’s lawyer says prosecution made purposeless attacks on her


Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/claim-against-agc-for-compensation-parti-liyani-lawyer-says-prosecution-made-purposeless-attacks-on-her

This article is funny. Every mentioned of the prosecutor is the defendant..

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Vid said:

Only max $10k compensation. I thought false accusation is serious business that can sue until underwear drop.

think could be a legacy thing from long long time ago when $10k was very big.

and not looked at for a long long time cos not every day that people take action against AGC. [grin]

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Blueray said:

think could be a legacy thing from long long time ago when $10k was very big.

and not looked at for a long long time cos not every day that people take action against AGC. [grin]

What is the difference between false accusations and defamation? Line very thin hor

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypersonic
13 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

What is the difference between false accusations and defamation? Line very thin hor 

Not important people vs very important people lor

  • Haha! 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

What is the difference between false accusations and defamation? Line very thin hor

Family lor... 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

What is the difference between false accusations and defamation? Line very thin hor

my layman understanding is that govt cannot defame people, so next best thing is false accusation lor.

for people vs people defamation is probably the highest so go for defamation lor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

High Court dismisses Parti Liyani's bid against AGC for $10,000 compensation

Quote

He noted that in Singapore's criminal justice system, it is not the case that an acquitted person is entitled as of right to compensation.

He also noted that a prosecution does not become frivolous or vexatious just because the conduct of prosecutors was unacceptable.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/high-court-dismisses-parti-liyanis-bid-for-compensation-against-agc

not unexpected ... [lipsrsealed]

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Blueray said:

High Court dismisses Parti Liyani's bid against AGC for $10,000 compensation

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/high-court-dismisses-parti-liyanis-bid-for-compensation-against-agc

not unexpected ... [lipsrsealed]

"He also noted that a prosecution does not become frivolous or vexatious just because the conduct of prosecutors was unacceptable"

[confused]

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Volvobrick said:

"He also noted that a prosecution does not become frivolous or vexatious just because the conduct of prosecutors was unacceptable"

[confused]

my understanding from the ST report.

1. conduct of prosecutors was unacceptable

2. but unacceptable conduct does not mean frivolous or vexatious

3. so therefore cannot claim compensation under S359(3)

 

 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What does the unacceptable conduct mean and what sort of penalty for that kind of conduct then? 

I donno thence I asked...that's the point of the questions 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypersonic
1 hour ago, Blueray said:

my understanding from the ST report.

1. conduct of prosecutors was unacceptable

2. but unacceptable conduct does not mean frivolous or vexatious

3. so therefore cannot claim compensation under S359(3)

 

 

Nb... had to google what vexatious is 🙄

My layman understanding is the high court accepted the unacceptable conduct.

  • Haha! 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Under Sec 359 (2), the claimant (Parti) has to prove:

1. Frivolous: A frivolous claim, often called a bad faith claim, refers to a lawsuit, motion or appeal that is intended to harass, delay or embarrass the opposition.

2. Vexatious: legal action which is brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary.

Both cases were preceded by the same judge.

Edited by inlinesix
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...