Nobody was harmed by a few photos. Why so harsh on him?

"nobody"? did you even bother to read her victim impact statement? people like you are the ones who enable creeps like him

Relax la nobody died and not a single drop of blood was spilled. Calm ur tits u feminist scum.

Heard now academia not prestigious liao. At one local university, there seems to be a mass exodus of juniors.

mother who was already very sick answered the door accepted docs but refused to sign
 

[2022] SGHC 114

In our judgment, V’s account of the respondent’s “emotional blackmail”, including
claiming that if V proceeded against him it would “hurt his mother who was
already very sick”

(c) On 2 October 2020 at around 11.45am, one Chan Lai Yin
(“Chan”), a process server from Allen & Gledhill, visited the Premises
to try to serve a copy of the documents that the Law Society intended to
rely on in the hearing before the DT. The respondent was not present at
the Premises. Instead, an elderly man and woman :D answered the door and informed Chan that they were the respondent’s parents. They told Chan
that the respondent was “outstationed” [sic], and that they did not know
when he would return to Singapore. The respondent’s mother accepted
the documents but refused to sign the acknowledgement because the
respondent’s father did not allow her :D :D to do so.


32 On 18 August 2021 at around 7.30pm, Allen & Gledhill again attempted
to serve the Documents on the respondent at the Premises. The process server,
one Lim Puay Hock (“Lim”), rang the doorbell at the Premises. The door was
opened by an elderly Chinese man who, upon seeing Lim, abruptly slammed
the door shut :D without saying anything.
In a subsequent affidavit filed on 3 September 2021, Lim confirmed, based on
photographs in Chan’s affidavit, that the elderly Chinese man who slammed the
door shut was the same man Chan had encountered and who had identified
himself to Chan as the respondent’s father.

Lol so Lawsoc asked for 3.5-5 year suspension but C3J struck off Mr Drew & Napier lawyer instead?

Walkover for Lawsoc's prosecuting counsel from A&G. Those 2 counsels must be feeling damn shiok. Don't need to do reply subs and still got more than they asked for.

Is CFA/ACCA worth alongside an LLB
 

Any thoughts?

He should have turned up to face the music.
He would have gotten a lighter sentence, and his name would still be redacted.

Drew Napier guy's parents refused to sign the acknowledgement, but didn't refuse Chan's phototaking for her affidavit lol

This family must be really into photography

Is the girl good looking?

Is the mother sick looking?
Got photo rite
Heard she already very sick

Read the C3J judgment. Dude left D&N and found employment in another law firm. If you know this person, you'd know that he landed on his feet pretty good.

Just before his criminal conviction, he found another job as inhouse counsel in an Indon company.

All things considered, this loser got lucky due to the gag order hiding his identity, despite being a beta pervert criminal.

He's probably living the life in Jakarta or something on good cushy pay, and I doubt the Indons give a rat's ass about an ex-con lawyer working for them - it's probably par for the course.

Meanwhile the victim also quit D&N and has to live with all sorts of emotional trauma for the rest of her life.

Sometimes life is really unfair and high fliers really don't suffer the repercussions of what they truly deserve.

Doubt her looks mattered to this Drew Napier pervert, he was only interested in photographing her underwear for god's sake.

Why did she expose her undies to him?

Stop victim blaming. It’s people with your mentality that creates such culture.

And all you people stop objectifying the victim.

Even so, he’d only have targeted her if , as OP asks, she is gd looks

Mr Ang explains this transparency deficit as prompted by the need to retain talent.

"We haven't even thought of (revealing numbers)," he says. "If we are too transparent, it creates unhealthy competition. The remuneration committee knows all the numbers but if you and I start comparing, it creates unhealthy competition. It makes people want to join particular firms just for the money."

s://.straitstimes.com/business/invest/patrick-angs-setting-rajah-and-tann-for-life-after-45

A backwater mentality. Surely if there is pay transparency, you would know better if a top assoc joining you is joining for your money or not? Also, this just sounds like the classic 'poor bf' argumentative: "but it is not about the money! I want to know you are with me not just for my money". If you are paying top rates, you would be proud and using that as part of your recruitment.

Also further in his argument on why performing junior RT lawyers are not paid good bonus... Come on la, EPs bring in work but the junior assocs do the heavy lifting. He also mentioned that junior lawyers i.e up to 3 PQE cost more than value add to the firm.. Hello, they are the most valuable to a file since they cost so little hourly but can more or less be used to run the day to day file.

Honestly this is just a shameless ad and one used by the firm's management to propagate outdated mindsets on assoc compensation and grievances. Pui!

Q: (Reads) “People say we got to check the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS). but I argue that the CCCS has to check the SMEs. If you don’t have a CCCS that checks the SMEs, when they don’t screen their products, we are going to end up with all kinds of products in the market. This will diminish the standing of the Singapore market. – Prime Minister on why he was exposing Mr.Tang. Just like your help on this so that the CCCS knows your approach. Are you saying that as CEO of a major MNC and board member of CCCS, you believe it’s you duty to check the SMEs?

A: First, let me clarify, I think, one word of it here. It could be a misquote. It should be “all kinds of products in the market”not “CCCS”.

Q: Exactly. So you mean ‘market’?

A: In ‘market’, that’s what I meant. Yes.

Q: Well, could you now kindly address the question: Do you take the view that as CEO of a major MNC and board member of CCCS, it’s your duty to check the SMEs?

A: Yes. I think when that statement was made in the context, I thought it as my duty to prevent unsavoury products from entering the market. So it’s my duty to check the competing SMEs who could do harm to the whole system of a CCCS' governance in Singapore.

Q: By ‘unsavoury products’, do you mean ‘products with unsavoury ingredients’ or ‘unsavoury packaging’?

A: Unsavoury packaging, taste. And in some cases, ingredients which are threatening to the health of Singaporeans.

Q: Look further down in terms of your approach to the free market, please. You advised the young consumers. Do you see them?

A: Yes.

Q: Half down, about voting, “we are telling them, we are not giving you the luxury of a choice.” Isn’t it rather odd for an anticompetitive commission in a free market to say you are not giving them the luxury of choice?

3PQE cost more than add value.
0PE cost more than add value because need to train them.
Aiya so basically only 1-2QPE are profitable la. OK noted whatever you say lor.
Explains their terrible attrition rate.

He pays himself very well. Remuneration in a law firm is a zero sum game. Less for you means more for them.

Mr Ang explains this transparency deficit as prompted by the fear of talent leaving for greener pastures.

"We haven't even thought of being transparent with salary information," he says. "If we are opaque, it allows us to underpay our underlings. The remuneration committee knows all the dirty secrets but if you and I start comparing, it reveals the unhealthy pay gap. It makes the sweatshops lose their underlings who want to jump to more equitable firms just for the fairer treatment."

The harder you work, the richer he gets!

Anybody can post the full ST Business article here?

Agree entirely. You mean got people join law firm and kill themselves working crazy hours in any big firm for reasons other than money meh? Logic is odd.

But at least the article alluded to RnT being a “big four firm”. At least it didn’t further the fiction of there being a “Big 5”.

Exactly, you mean there are people who kill themselves working the hours expected in a Big 4 firm for anything other than money meh?

although at least the article talks about RnT as a “big 4” firm thereby making clear that there is no such thing as a “Big 5” in our legal industry.

Article from our competitor. Pui!
- said Big 5 firm

"Big 5" is quite funny though. Every few months their sig bar changes with the addition of a random associated office in Timbuktu or Madagascar or whatnot. I'm sure opening its 15th African office in some third-tier city in Africa is gonna take Dentons to the same heights of global prestige as Kirkland or Latham. Lol

Hi seniors, can someone help me clarify whether 1PQE means the next Aug from your mass call (usually happens in Aug every year), or the next calendar year in Jan (meaning 4 months after your call)?

Asking in the context of salary scales that list the bands for NQ, 1PQE, 2PQE etc. What is the practice in B4 regarding salary increments?
Thanks!

B4 firms don't really use "PQE" to describe seniority, that's more of a UK firm phrase.

B4 firms:
You increase your level of seniority / get a pay increment at the start (i.e. 1 Jan) of each calendar year.
So if you qualify in Apr or Aug, you are A1 for the rest of the calendar year (and on A1 salary).
Then from 1 Jan of the next calendar year, you are A2 (and on A2 salary).
This continues until the associate lockstep ends: A1, A2, A3, A4, SA1, SA2, SA3 etc.

That was my experience in 2 B4 firms.

In UK firms:
First 12 months after you qualify = NQ
Next 12 months = 1PQE
etc.

US firms use "class year", but there is so much discrepancy amongst international offices of US firms that this is a whole other discussion...

i come from litigation background
3 pqe
and I got a matching salary in house role offer
I wonder If i should take up
or
should I continue practice? but am unsure what at the end of the light for litigation lawyer

I think the future for litigation is bleak except for criminal litigation, but criminal litigation doesn't pay well. For the other fields of litigation, it is clear that the judiciary is trying to push ADR vigorously so it means lesser costs for lawyers. And in family and negligence, there are already moves to cut out the lawyers by making materials accessible to potential LIPs.

Basically 'eat what you kill' litigation is dying. It may not look like it now but the pie is being reduced greatly.

There will still be SCs and top B4 teams monopolizing bet-the-company litigation but for the mid tier and run-of-the-mill litigators, good luck.

This area of practice is only going to be viable if you're a litigator servicing a particular industry with a steady stream of mandates from industry clients, such as insolvency, shipping, insurance, debt recovery and occasional defense of banks. But these are hardly the best paying matters due to institutional client cost-consciousness.

Am a girl here. Given the appointment of the new Dean in SMU law school, I hope something is properly done to curb the guys who think with their jiao jiao.... All these negative news surrounding the legal community are disgusting, from cheating, staff abuse, practising without proper certification to outrage of modesty.

Also wanted to add one thing, SMU said they did a global search for a new Dean. This is truly ironic, they search the whole and eventually chose one in their faculty. Lol what kind of global search is that? Internal promotion just say internal promotion la, why the grandiose

Were you snapped by Thanos and just returned? GYH has been dean of SMU Law since 2017...

why you say smu never say nus. nus also global search. that one even funnier.

Lee Pey Woan is the new dean...

GYH goes for more prestigious, lucrative job liao. Get that SC pay, why waste time dealing with teeny weeny school admin/management work. Tbh, his work in SMU has less than 10 percent legal elements.

The latest appointment of the smu dean shows you two things:
(1) Uk law school grads do not have dimmer prospects than local counterparts.
(2) an LLM from Oxbridge or Harvard is strictly necessary for consideration to be dean of a Singapore law school

Those who went in house from private practice do you regret it?