AGC Seeks Vexatious Litigant Status for Iris Koh and Husband

by Rachel Morgan News Editor

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) appeared in the High Court on July 15 to request that Iris Koh, founder of the group Healing the Divide, and her husband, Raymond Ng, be declared vexatious litigants. The designation would require the couple to obtain court permission before initiating any new civil proceedings or continuing existing ones, following allegations that they have habitually abused the court process to harass others and raise funds.

Did You Know? Raymond Ng previously announced the development of an artificial intelligence system intended specifically for filing defamation lawsuits against thousands of individuals without the need for legal counsel.

Allegations of a Litigation Business Model

State Counsel Vincent Leow argued before Justice Hoo Sheau Peng that the couple treats litigation as an “instant recourse” whenever they feel aggrieved. According to the AGC, the couple has engaged in a “business model of warfare,” utilizing crowdfunding to finance lawsuits that the state contends are filed without legal basis. Leow stated that when the couple is found to have abused the court process, they use the crowdfunded proceeds to pay associated costs and further develop their AI legal systems.

The prosecution cited a judicial review application against the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) as a primary example of this conduct. In that instance, Koh and Ng sought a mandatory order to force the HSA to prosecute entities using celebrities for vaccine advertising. The court ultimately found the couple had abused the court process and ordered them to pay $12,000 in costs.

Impact of Legal Actions

The hearing highlighted the human cost of the couple’s legal strategy. State Counsel Leow referenced a coroner’s report concerning the September 2024 suicide of 46-year-old Geno Ong Kay Yong. The report indicated that Ong suffered significant financial stress due to two defamation lawsuits initiated by Ng, with her legal fees totaling between $55,000 and $65,000. In a note and social media post, Ong cited these escalating legal costs as a factor in her decision to end her life.

Defense and Upcoming Proceedings

Representing Ng, lawyer Daniel Koh of Eldan Law challenged the characterization of his client, arguing that Ng has been a target of social media attacks and is, in truth, a victim. The defense questioned the impact of the proposed restriction, noting that it would cause significant delays should Ng need to initiate legitimate legal action, such as in the event of a vehicle accident. Iris Koh is represented by Nicholas Jeyaraj Narayanan of Nicholas & Tan Partnership.

Court Orders Iris Koh and Raymond Ng's Belongings to Be Seized Over Unpaid Defamation Costs

Beyond the current High Court application, both individuals face separate legal challenges. Raymond Ng is currently on trial in the State Courts on six charges of cheating, accused of deceiving individuals into investing in coffee vending machines; his next pre-trial conference is set for Aug 7. Iris Koh is involved in a trial regarding alleged false representations made to the Ministry of Health regarding Covid-19 vaccinations between 2021 and 2022. Her next pre-trial conference is scheduled for July 27.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a vexatious litigant?
According to the AGC, a vexatious litigant is an individual who habitually and persistently initiates legal proceedings without reasonable grounds, typically to abuse the court process or harass opponents.

What is the AGC asking the High Court to do?
The AGC is seeking an order that would require Iris Koh and Raymond Ng to obtain the court’s permission before they can start any new civil lawsuits or continue existing ones.

What are the current criminal charges against the couple?
Raymond Ng is on trial for allegedly cheating six people out of $25,000 regarding coffee vending machine investments. Iris Koh is involved in a trial regarding an alleged conspiracy to make false representations to the Ministry of Health concerning Sinopharm vaccinations.

How should the court balance an individual’s right to sue with the need to prevent the abuse of legal processes?

You may also like

Leave a Comment