Lock Han Chng Jonathan v Goh Jessiline

Lock Han Chng Jonathan v. Goh Jessiline
Court	Court of Appeal of Singapore
Full case name	Lock Han Chng Jonathan (Jonathan Luo Hancheng) v. Goh Jessiline
Decided	31 December 2007
Citation(s)	[2008] 2 S.L.R.(R.) 455
Case history
Prior action(s)	M.C. Suit No. 21830 of 2005; [2007] 3 S.L.R.(R.) 51, High Court
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting	Chan Sek Keong C.J., Andrew Phang and V. K. Rajah JJ.A.
Case opinions
Settlements made at the Primary Dispute Resolution Centre of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore are binding, and can be included in a court order for enforcement purposes. All parties to pay own costs except Lock; his former lawyer to be investigated for possible breach of professional duties.

Lock Han Chng Jonathan v. Goh Jessiline was a court case decided in the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 31 December 2007 which concerned the validity of settlements made at the Primary Dispute Resolution Centre (PDRC) of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore.

The case was highly publicized in the media for the absurdities in the legal process leading up to the appeal, which ballooned from a compensation payment of S$187.50 to over $120,000 in legal costs over a minor vehicle accident.^[1][2][3][4] In particular, one of the appeal judges, Justice V. K. Rajah, expressed to one of the lawyers representing Goh's insurers NTUC Income that "you used a sledgehammer to crack a nut, when all you needed was a nutcracker."^[2]

The court decided that all parties were to bear their own legal costs except appellant Jonathan Lock, who could not be billed by his ex-lawyer Andrew Hanam without the court's permission and who was to have his legal costs for the appeal paid by NTUC Income. The Chief Justice also directed the Law Society of Singapore to investigate Hanam's professional conduct.^[5] The court upheld the PDRC's decisions in dispute resolution to be binding in subsequent court orders.^[2][3]