Dato' Pahlawan Ramli bin Yusuff v Tetuan Vin Law & Co

wa-12bncvc-60-05-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 27 March 2025 • WA-12BNCvC-60-05/2024 • 27 min read

9 cases cited (0 SG, 9 foreign)

Catchwords

Whether the SCJ has jurisdiction to hear the taxation of the Bill of Costs - Whether the SCJ had erred in fact and law in deciding that, vide the 27.11.2017 Letter, the Appellant had requested for “a bill containing detailed items” within the meaning of proviso (a) in sub-s 121(1) of the LPA 1976 -

Judges (1)

Aliza binti Sulaiman Delivered

Counsel (8)

KP Lu & Tan Firm Vinod Kamalanathan & Associates Firm Alicia Goh Ai Chen Counsel Respondent David Matthews Counsel Respondent Kamalanathan Ratnam Counsel Appellant Muhammad Azim Akif bin Saiful Bahri Counsel Appellant Tan Jing Yi Counsel Respondent Vinod R. Kamalanathan Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Tetuan Vin Law & Co Respondent Dato' Pahlawan Ramli bin Yusuff Appellant

Case Significance

Dato' Pahlawan Ramli bin Yusuff v Tetuan Vin Law & Co is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated March 27, 2025 (citation: wa-12bncvc-60-05-2024). The case was decided by Aliza binti Sulaiman.

What was the outcome of Dato' Pahlawan Ramli bin Yusuff v Tetuan Vin Law & Co?

Dato' Pahlawan Ramli bin Yusuff v Tetuan Vin Law & Co is a High Court decision dated March 27, 2025. The case was heard by Aliza binti Sulaiman. See the full judgment for details.

Statutes Cited

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)

s 29

Legal Profession Act 1976 (Cap 166)

s 121(1)

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (9)

MY (9)

[1936] MLJ 278 [1984] 1 MLJ 95 [1995] 3 MLJ 273 [1998] 1 MLJ 393 [2001] 1 CLJ 583 [2010] 9 CLJ 328 [2011] MLJU 139 [2015] 7 MLJ 763 [2020] 12 MLJ 67

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-12bncvc-60-05-2024)