The Singapore Law Ministry has criticised reports that Essex Court Chambers will be opening in the country.
On 14 November Essex Court Chambers announced on its website that four Singapore lawyers (including former Attorney-General VK Rajah) had become members of Essex Court Chambers and would practise in Singapore under the name Essex Court Chambers Duxton. In the press release Head of Chambers David Foxton QC trumpeted the recruitment saying that it would help "members of Chambers to respond to the challenges and opportunities generated by the increasingly transnational nature of commercial, financial and international law disputes".
Several legal publications picked up on the announcement with The Lawyer commenting that "Essex Court Chambers will have the largest presence in Singapore among UK's commercial sets".
However, the Ministry of Law in Singapore has peed on the parade by issuing a statement saying that it was surprised and concerned by the media reports since such arrangement had not been approved. The Ministry also wrote a letter to the four members of Essex Court Chambers Duxton complaining that the press release and related news reports created the impression that Essex Court Chambers Duxton "is part of Essex Court Chambers in London" which was contrary to representations made in the application.
A spokeswoman for Essex Court Chambers told RollOnFriday "It has been drawn to our attention that certain media reports concerning the practice of the members of the Singapore Group Practice and their relationship with chambers have misunderstood the correct position". The barrister chambers has now deleted its previous press release on its website replacing it with a caveat-filled statement saying that the Singapore Group Practice is neither a branch nor an annexe of Essex Court Chambers.
The carefully-worded release says that the Singapore lawyers will act as independent advisors and advocates. So, it seems the new operation in Singapore is Essex Court Chambers in nothing but name.
Update: Essex Court Chambers Duxton has written to the Ministry to confirm that media reports suggesting that the Singapore group practice was set up by Essex Court Chambers were mistaken, and that they have contacted the media outlets to ask that corrections be made. The Ministry has accepted this explanation and says that the matter is now resolved.
Tip Off ROF
On 14 November Essex Court Chambers announced on its website that four Singapore lawyers (including former Attorney-General VK Rajah) had become members of Essex Court Chambers and would practise in Singapore under the name Essex Court Chambers Duxton. In the press release Head of Chambers David Foxton QC trumpeted the recruitment saying that it would help "members of Chambers to respond to the challenges and opportunities generated by the increasingly transnational nature of commercial, financial and international law disputes".
Several legal publications picked up on the announcement with The Lawyer commenting that "Essex Court Chambers will have the largest presence in Singapore among UK's commercial sets".
However, the Ministry of Law in Singapore has peed on the parade by issuing a statement saying that it was surprised and concerned by the media reports since such arrangement had not been approved. The Ministry also wrote a letter to the four members of Essex Court Chambers Duxton complaining that the press release and related news reports created the impression that Essex Court Chambers Duxton "is part of Essex Court Chambers in London" which was contrary to representations made in the application.
 |
Fake News! Shame! |
 |
"Ye must riddle me this. I bear the name of something that I am not. What am I?" |
The carefully-worded release says that the Singapore lawyers will act as independent advisors and advocates. So, it seems the new operation in Singapore is Essex Court Chambers in nothing but name.
Update: Essex Court Chambers Duxton has written to the Ministry to confirm that media reports suggesting that the Singapore group practice was set up by Essex Court Chambers were mistaken, and that they have contacted the media outlets to ask that corrections be made. The Ministry has accepted this explanation and says that the matter is now resolved.