|
|
|||||||
| Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature Visit Sam's Alfresco Heaven. Singapore's best Alfresco Coffee Experience! If you're up to your ears with all this Sex Talk and would like to take a break from it all to discuss other interesting aspects of life in Singapore, pop over and join in the fun. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
23-10-2014, 10:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Complaint filed with SMC against council member
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
The High Court ruled last month (4 Sep) that the Singapore Medical Council (SMC), which sought a legal bill of $1.33 million against Dr Susan Lim, had highly inflated its bill and reduced the amount to $317,000, less than 1/4 of the original amount sought. SMC was earlier represented by Senior Counsel Alvin Yeo and Melanie Ho of WongPartnership LLP. Alvin Yeo is an MP of Chua Chu Kang GRC. One of the bills that was reduced by the High Court was that of a medical expert used by SMC, Dr Hong Ga Sze. He was testifying on SMC’s side, giving testimony against Dr Susan Lim in her trial 2 years ago (‘Susan Lim case: SMC member’s fee ‘exorbitant’‘). Dr Hong’s expert witness fees “very high”, “exorbitant”, “disproportionately high” and “questionable” In its ruling, the High Court described the fees charged by Dr Hong as “very high”, “exorbitant”, “disproportionately high” and “questionable”. Dr Hong’s fees were purportedly incurred as follows: $14,000 for “pre-trial discussions with WongPartnership” from 18 March 2009 to 3 February 2010 $6,000 for “standby for trial” on 4 February 2010 $14,000 for “expert evidence” on 8 April 2010 $6,000 for “preparation of trial report” In its judgement, the court said, “Dr Hong’s charge of $14,000 for giving expert evidence on just one day (8 Apr 2010) is very high when one compares that with the expert fees allowed in the precedents and when the expert evidence that Dr Hong gave did not involve complex, technical or medical expertise… Dr Hong’s expert evidence related to billing practices.” “It is therefore questionable whether the Applicant (SMC) should be allowed to claim against the Respondent (Dr Susan Lim) for the full extent of the fees that Dr Hong charged the Applicant,” the court added in its judgement. The court also found that Dr Hong’s fee of $6,000 just for “standing by”, that is, waiting to take the witness stand was “exorbitant”. The fee of $6,000 for preparing a trial report by Dr Hong was also....http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/10/23...ouncil-member/ Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com. 
|
| Advert Space Available |
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
