AGC urges court to declare Raymond Ng, Iris Koh vexatious litigants; defence backs their right to sue
The Attorney-General Chambers said the couple was waging “lawfare” and weaponising the civil justice process for collateral purposes, while court-appointed lawyers for the couple said the orders sought would be “unfair”.
Raymond Ng Kai Hoe (right) and his wife Iris Koh arriving at the Supreme Court on Jul 15, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Mak Jia Kee)
New: You can now listen to articles.
This audio is generated by an AI tool.
Read a summary of this article on FAST.
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
SINGAPORE: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) on Wednesday (Jul 15) presented a detailed case seeking orders to declare Iris Koh and her husband Raymond Ng as vexatious litigants and to restrain them from launching lawsuits.
If granted, the orders could also cease all pending lawsuits the couple have mounted and require them to seek the court’s permission to proceed with any fresh ones.
Chief Counsel of the AGC’s civil division, Deputy Solicitor-General Vincent Leow, argued that the couple was waging “lawfare” and weaponising the civil justice process for collateral purposes.
In seeking the orders, Mr Leow highlighted four civil cases mounted in the courts by one or other of the couple.
He said the couple developed a business model, raising funds to launch lawsuits, the majority of which are in defamation.
Along with his fellow state counsels, Mr Leow said in written submissions that the pair have gone “far beyond ordinary bounds of litigation to engage in a calculated lawfare strategy” to “exploit others” and “monetise litigation”.
While costs might usually deter people from taking out lawsuits, the couple face “no real costs” since they crowdfund to cover their costs, he said.
If there are no consequences to their “conduct”, Mr Leow said a person can “just willy-nilly (go) around funding lawsuits”.
The AGC is seeking to declare the couple vexatious litigants under Section 74 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. To succeed, they must prove that the couple had habitually and persistently and without any reasonable grounds instituted vexatious legal proceedings.
If the orders sought under Section 74 are not granted, the AGC is seeking general civil restraint orders under Section 73D instead.
This would restrain the couple from commencing any civil action or making any civil application without permission of the court for two years.
Mr Leow said there was a “consistent pattern” in the couple’s actions in seeking applications that had “no real reasonable basis”.
While they were unrepresented in their civil lawsuits, Mr Leow said the court has said that litigants in person are held to the same rules.
“If this was a one-off incident we would not be here. But you have a continual pattern of taking out applications that have no real merit,” he said.
“I think at some point, enough is enough. At some point, the excuse that I’m just a litigant in person must ring hollow. If every application I’m bringing fails because it has no merit, the question has to be asked why are you still doing so.”
Mr Leow took the court through four cases mounted by one or other of the couple: Against the Health Sciences Authority (HSA), against former Nominated Member of Parliament Calvin Cheng, against the National University of Singapore (NUS), and against a person who shared a Facebook post, Mr Wong Peng Kong.
The first was a judicial review application against HSA in relation to how COVID-19 vaccines were advertised. It failed and the court found that there was no prime facie case of reasonable suspicion that there was any merit in the case.
The second was a defamation action against businessman Mr Cheng while the third was a claim against NUS and an unidentified “NUS colleague” in relation to Associate Professor Ben Leong.
The fourth case was by Ng against Mr Wong, a man who had shared an article by Rice Media about alleged victims of Ng, linked to his business Vendshare.
Ng won this case but was granted only nominal damages of S$1, with the deputy registrar presiding over the case saying Ng’s reputation was not deserving of legal protection.
Mr Leow showed the court a letter sent by Ng where he said he was suing someone for S$50,000 (US$38,700), but was willing to accept settlement of S$5,000.
Mr Leow said this was a threat seeking compensation for S$5,000, which, if not given, would lead to the case being taken to court and potential damages going up to S$50,000.
He also took the court through several transcripts of social media and website posts by Koh and Ng. In some of these posts, Koh asked for funds, while Ng said in one video aired in court: “You know this lawsuit thing I can even make some money for me you know.”
At one point in the proceedings, Justice Hoo Sheau Peng told a person in the public gallery to behave as court proceedings are not “entertainment”.
RAYMOND NG A “VICTIM”, ORDERS SOUGHT UNFAIR: DEFENCE
The court had appointed lawyers for the couple, with Mr Daniel Koh from Eldan Law representing Ng and Mr Nicholas Narayanan from Nicholas & Tan Partnership for Koh.
Mr Koh said the orders sought by the AGC were too broad and were unfair to his client.
“As much as the applicant is painting my client out as a villain, the truth is my client has been relentlessly flamed and attacked by others on social media,” he said. “My client is in truth a victim.”
Mr Koh said should the orders sought by the AGC be granted and someone rear-ends Ng in a traffic accident tomorrow, Ng cannot even begin an action against the person who rammed into him.
Mr Koh said most civil proceedings are commenced in the hopes that parties will come to a settlement and there is nothing really wrong with a litigant issuing a letter of demand.
He said the HSA judicial review case was the first case mounted by Ng. He noted that court stated they were not prepared to find that the commencement of the suit was unreasonable.
Just because a case is struck out because of abuse of process does not mean it was commenced in abuse of process, said Mr Koh.
He said Ng has explained that he has learnt his mistakes from the earlier cases.
“My client is not one of those archetypal (vexatious) litigants who will restart a court case, reframe the issues and try to resuscitate the case, my client is not that sort of creature,” said Mr Koh.
On the case of Ms Geno Ong, who was sued by Ng and killed herself in part due to rising legal costs, Mr Koh said there were online posts directed at Ng which were “at best inflammatory and at worst ominous and threatening”.
He said if the orders sought are granted, his client will not be able to defend himself against defamatory comments that come from Ms Ong’s “camp”.
Koh’s lawyer, Mr Narayanan, said that apart from the HSA and NUS cases, Koh has obtained favourable outcomes in quite a number of cases.
He said certain media entities made concessions to his client. For example, the media outlet Mothership agreed to update their publication with additional information; the Singapore Academy of Law confirmed that its link to an article was no longer publicly accessible; and The Independent signed a settlement agreement with Koh.
These instances alone show that proceedings begun by Koh were not vexatious but that there were reasonable grounds for her to file them.
Mr Narayanan noted that Mr Cheng, the former NMP, has filed a counterclaim against Koh. If the orders sought are granted, she will face “immense prejudice” and there will be “an inequality of arms”.
“Because you will have Mr Cheng prosecuting and persecuting her in the counterclaim against her, whilst she then has to come back to court to seek permission to reinstate her statement of claim,” said Mr Narayanan.
“I think that is a real fear on her part.”
Justice Hoo adjourned the case, saying she intended to give her decision within a month.
Separately, the first tranche of Ng’s criminal trial on cheating charges just ended.
Koh is also in the midst of a trial on different charges linked to COVID-19 vaccines.
Source: CNA/ll
Sign up for our newsletters
Get the CNA app
Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories
Get WhatsApp alerts
Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
About The Author
