Legal Profession
12 cases · June 2017 to June 2026
Case Volume by Year
2 17
1 19
1 23
2 24
2 25
4 26
2017–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Disciplinary proceedings — Appeal against decision of Disciplinary Board — Whether appeal should have been filed in Kuala Lumpur High Court — Order 55A Rule 1(1) Rules of Court 2012 — Concurrent jurisdiction of High Court branches — Whether appeal filed out of time — Section 103E Legal Profession Act 1976 — Whether administrator of deceased's estate has locus standi to appeal — "Any party aggrieved" — Whether stakeholder's breach constitutes professional misconduct — Sections 94(3)(c), (n), (o) and 112(1)(a) Legal Profession Act 1976 1 Professional misconduct — Solicitor acting as stakeholder — Breach of fiduciary duties — Solicitor purchasing properties the subject of conveyancing transaction — Whether conduct fell within prohibition under Section 112(1)(a) Legal Profession Act 1976 — Failure to protect interests of party who had paid for properties — Whether conduct unbefitting of advocate and solicitor — Whether brings profession into disrepute — Appeal allowed — Disciplinary Board's decision set aside — Matter remitted to Disciplinary Board for penalty 1 Admission to the Bar — Pupillage — Pupil — Requirement of short call order — Legal Profession Act 1976, ss 11(1)(e), 15(3)(h), 36(2), 36(2A) — Legal Profession (Amendment) Act 2025 — Statutory linkage between pupillage, limited rights of audience and admission. 1 Advocate and solicitor — Retainer — Termination by client — Right to change solicitor — Legal Profession Act 1976 s 120 — Rules and Rulings of Bar Council — Consent of solicitor on record — Effect of termination on authority to act. 1 Disciplinary Committee — Inquiry by the Disciplinary Committee — Appointment of Disciplinary Committee was delayed — Appellant filed originating summons seeking a declaration that the Disciplinary Board's appointment of the Disciplinary Committee members was out of time in accordance with section 103A of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) — time stipulated in the LPA is mandatory — non-compliance renders the proceedings invalid — Whether High Court judge’s refusal to grant declaratory reliefs on basis of originating summons being premature was correct in law. 1 Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board (“DB”) Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Whether there was failure by HCJ to appreciate the absence of the Appellant’s personal culpability in the allegation of misconduct — Whether HCJ misdirected herself in applying section 12 of the Partnership Act 1961 instead 1 Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against the DB's Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Appellant not allowed to call witness at DC proceedings — Whether there was failure by HCJ in addressing issue of breach of natural justice during the hearing before the DC 1 Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against DB's Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Whether there was failure by HCJ to appreciate the beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof at DC proceedings. 1 Disciplinary proceedings — Solicitor’s undertaking — Conditional undertaking issued by Legal Assistant — Firm discharged before receipt of funds — Cheque returned undeposited — Whether undertaking matured into binding obligation — Whether Legal Assistant personally liable for firm issued undertaking — Whether termination of retainer extinguished authority — Whether disciplinary proceedings flawed — Absence of complainant at inquiry — Denial of cross-examination rights — Standard of proof not stated — Increase of fine by Disciplinary Board without reasons — Whether serious procedural irregularities vitiated proceedings — Whether prejudice caused to solicitor — Whether decision of Disciplinary Board and Disciplinary Committee liable to be set aside — Legal Profession Act 1976 ss 94(2)(c), 94(3)(d), 100, 103, 103B, 103C, 103D, 103E, 138 — Legal Profession (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2017 rr 14, 16, 27 1 Practising advocate and solicitor — Duties of solicitor — Stakeholder — Trustee — Agent — Solicitor's lien 1 Legal Profession Act 1976 (“LPA”) — Complaint — Professional discipline — Misconduct — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Whether disciplinary board (“DB”) had erred in dismissing the complaint under s 100(3)(a) of the LPA — Whether appellate interference warranted 1 Professional discipline — Misconduct — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Duties of stakeholder — Whether stakeholder is obligated to follow the instructions of the party who appointed him or the terms of the stakeholding agreement — Whether stakeholder should release the deposit when conditions precedent are not met — Whether stakeholder acted in accordance with the terms of the stakeholding — Whether terms of the stakeholding have been complied with — Whether respondent’s refusal to release the Deposit to the appellant was justified — Whether refusal constituted misconduct 1 Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary Board/Committee — Disciplinary Board (‘DB’) affirmed Disciplinary Committee’s (‘DC’) decision on liability that appellant committed misconduct under s 94(3)(n) and (o) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (“LPA”) 1 DB affirmed the DC’s findings on liability — s 103D(1) LPA — DB rejected the recommendation on punishment of restitution by the DC 1 Professional negligence — Whether there was solicitor-client relationship between plaintiff and respondent — Whether plaintiff could disavow that there was any solicitor-client relationship with plaintiff 1 Disciplinary Board — Complaint against advocate for professional misconduct — Complaint dismissed by Disciplinary Board — Appeal to High Court dismissed — Appeal to Court of Appeal dismissed — Whether letter of complaint amounted to complain as envisaged by Legal Profession Act 1976 — Whether respondent drafted or involved in drafting of statutory declaration — Legal Profession Act 1976 s 99 1 Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary Board (DB) /Committee (DC) — Appeal — Legal firm represented orang asli beneficiaries in claim regarding compensation for acquisition of ancestral land — Judgment obtained against Johor State Government — Compensation monies paid out to legal firm but not given to orang asli beneficiaries — Complaint by respondent, an advocate and solicitor on behalf of Saling — Whether DB/DC had jurisdiction to register/set up and inquire into this complaint — Whether proceedings before DB/DC were properly conducted — Principle of proportionality and the principles of sentencing in meeting out sentences —Whether name of 1st appellant as advocate and solicitor ought to be struck off Rolls of Advocates and Solicitors — Legal Profession Act 1976 [Act 166],section 94(3), section 103 (1A), section 103B (1), Section 103B (2), section 103C 1 Disciplinary proceedings — Appeal against decision of disciplinary board — Whether Court of Appeal erred in requiring charge to be specifically framed or preferred against advocate and solicitor in disciplinary proceedings — Whether there was any prejudice or denial of natural justice to advocate or solicitor — Whether DB and DC required to frame specific charge against advocate and solicitor — Whether findings of DC and DB in disciplinary proceedings fell within scope of complaint — Whether DB had power to enhance punishment recommended by DC without giving reasons — Whether period of suspension imposed unreasonable and inappropriate 1
Disciplinary proceedings — Appeal against decision of Disciplinary Board — Whether appeal should have been filed in Kuala Lumpur High Court — Order 55A Rule 1(1) Rules of Court 2012 — Concurrent jurisdiction of High Court branches — Whether appeal filed out of time — Section 103E Legal Profession Act 1976 — Whether administrator of deceased's estate has locus standi to appeal — "Any party aggrieved" — Whether stakeholder's breach constitutes professional misconduct — Sections 94(3)(c), (n), (o) and 112(1)(a) Legal Profession Act 1976 1 case
Professional misconduct — Solicitor acting as stakeholder — Breach of fiduciary duties — Solicitor purchasing properties the subject of conveyancing transaction — Whether conduct fell within prohibition under Section 112(1)(a) Legal Profession Act 1976 — Failure to protect interests of party who had paid for properties — Whether conduct unbefitting of advocate and solicitor — Whether brings profession into disrepute — Appeal allowed — Disciplinary Board's decision set aside — Matter remitted to Disciplinary Board for penalty 1 case
Admission to the Bar — Pupillage — Pupil — Requirement of short call order — Legal Profession Act 1976, ss 11(1)(e), 15(3)(h), 36(2), 36(2A) — Legal Profession (Amendment) Act 2025 — Statutory linkage between pupillage, limited rights of audience and admission. 1 case
Disciplinary Committee — Inquiry by the Disciplinary Committee — Appointment of Disciplinary Committee was delayed — Appellant filed originating summons seeking a declaration that the Disciplinary Board's appointment of the Disciplinary Committee members was out of time in accordance with section 103A of the Legal Profession Act (LPA) — time stipulated in the LPA is mandatory — non-compliance renders the proceedings invalid — Whether High Court judge’s refusal to grant declaratory reliefs on basis of originating summons being premature was correct in law. 1 case
Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board (“DB”) Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Whether there was failure by HCJ to appreciate the absence of the Appellant’s personal culpability in the allegation of misconduct — Whether HCJ misdirected herself in applying section 12 of the Partnership Act 1961 instead 1 case
Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against the DB's Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Appellant not allowed to call witness at DC proceedings — Whether there was failure by HCJ in addressing issue of breach of natural justice during the hearing before the DC 1 case
Dismissal by HCJ of Appellant’s appeal against DB's Order which ordered that the Appellant (a) be suspended for six months; and (b) pay a fine amounting to MYR50,000 — Whether there was failure by HCJ to appreciate the beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof at DC proceedings. 1 case
Practising advocate and solicitor — Duties of solicitor — Stakeholder — Trustee — Agent — Solicitor's lien 1 case
Legal Profession Act 1976 (“LPA”) — Complaint — Professional discipline — Misconduct — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Whether disciplinary board (“DB”) had erred in dismissing the complaint under s 100(3)(a) of the LPA — Whether appellate interference warranted 1 case
Professional discipline — Misconduct — Breach of solicitor’s undertaking — Duties of stakeholder — Whether stakeholder is obligated to follow the instructions of the party who appointed him or the terms of the stakeholding agreement — Whether stakeholder should release the deposit when conditions precedent are not met — Whether stakeholder acted in accordance with the terms of the stakeholding — Whether terms of the stakeholding have been complied with — Whether respondent’s refusal to release the Deposit to the appellant was justified — Whether refusal constituted misconduct 1 case
Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary Board/Committee — Disciplinary Board (‘DB’) affirmed Disciplinary Committee’s (‘DC’) decision on liability that appellant committed misconduct under s 94(3)(n) and (o) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (“LPA”) 1 case
DB affirmed the DC’s findings on liability — s 103D(1) LPA — DB rejected the recommendation on punishment of restitution by the DC 1 case
Professional negligence — Whether there was solicitor-client relationship between plaintiff and respondent — Whether plaintiff could disavow that there was any solicitor-client relationship with plaintiff 1 case
Disciplinary Board — Complaint against advocate for professional misconduct — Complaint dismissed by Disciplinary Board — Appeal to High Court dismissed — Appeal to Court of Appeal dismissed — Whether letter of complaint amounted to complain as envisaged by Legal Profession Act 1976 — Whether respondent drafted or involved in drafting of statutory declaration — Legal Profession Act 1976 s 99 1 case
Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary Board (DB) /Committee (DC) — Appeal — Legal firm represented orang asli beneficiaries in claim regarding compensation for acquisition of ancestral land — Judgment obtained against Johor State Government — Compensation monies paid out to legal firm but not given to orang asli beneficiaries — Complaint by respondent, an advocate and solicitor on behalf of Saling — Whether DB/DC had jurisdiction to register/set up and inquire into this complaint — Whether proceedings before DB/DC were properly conducted — Principle of proportionality and the principles of sentencing in meeting out sentences —Whether name of 1st appellant as advocate and solicitor ought to be struck off Rolls of Advocates and Solicitors — Legal Profession Act 1976 [Act 166],section 94(3), section 103 (1A), section 103B (1), Section 103B (2), section 103C 1 case
Disciplinary proceedings — Appeal against decision of disciplinary board — Whether Court of Appeal erred in requiring charge to be specifically framed or preferred against advocate and solicitor in disciplinary proceedings — Whether there was any prejudice or denial of natural justice to advocate or solicitor — Whether DB and DC required to frame specific charge against advocate and solicitor — Whether findings of DC and DB in disciplinary proceedings fell within scope of complaint — Whether DB had power to enhance punishment recommended by DC without giving reasons — Whether period of suspension imposed unreasonable and inappropriate 1 case
Key Statutes
Legal Profession Act 1976 (Cap 166)
cited in 6 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Insolvency Act 1967 (Cap 360)
cited in 1 case Partnership Act 1961
cited in 1 case Partnership Act
cited in 1 case Penal Code (Cap 574)
cited in 1 case Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
cited in 1 case Income Tax Act 1967 (Cap 53)
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Ramly bin Haji Ali 2 Panglima Richard Malanjum 2 Ahmad bin Haji Maarop 2 Zaharah binti Ibrahim 2 Raja Segaran a/l S.krishnan 2 Wan Ahmad Farid bin Wan Salleh 2 Mohd Zawawi bin Salleh 1 Panglima David Wong Dak Wah 1 Balia Yusof bin Haji Wahi 1 Abu Samah bin Nordin 1 Azahar bin Mohamed 1 Md. Raus bin Sharif 1 Prasad Sandosham Abraham 1 Moses Susayan 1 Che Mohd Ruzima bin Ghazali 1
Top Firms
Phee, Chen & Ung 1 Amran Joseph Chan & Co 1 Josephine, L K Chow & Co 1 JT Chong Associates 1 Gunaseelan & Associates 1 Kumar Jaspal Quah & Aishah 1 Zahari Affendi & Partners 1 Salina Fazilawati & Co 1 Abu Talib Shahrom 1 Nordin Kassim & Aziz 1 Jeffrey & Co 1 T.Y. Teh & Partners 1 Patrick Yeoh & Company 1 ADLIZA SUBRA SITI & PARTNERS 1 Nurul Hafidzah & Associates 1
Top Lawyers
Shivdev Singh 1 Yung Chirt Kye 1 Yong Li Tzer 1 Lim Kien Huat 1 Cyndi Chow Li Kian 1 Chan Wei Yang 1 Hang Qiu Min 1 Chong Joo Tian 1 Keshvinjeet Singh 1 Datuk Vignesh Kumar 1 Yasinthra a/p Dorairaju 1 Iffah Jalilah binti Ithnin @ Jasmin 1 Zahari Affendi Bin Abdul Kadir 1 Nor Atikah Binti Ibrahim 1 Santhini Thanapalan 1
Cases
ta-17d-1-04-2025
MUHAMMAD ALIF IQBAL BIN MOHD RODI (SEBAGAI PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA MOHD RODI BIN SHARI) v 1. ) NORFAZILAWATI BINTI CHE HARUN 2. ) MOHD NASIR BIN ABDULLAH (BERAMAL ATAS NAMA DAN GAYA TETUAN NASIR & CO)
17 June 2026
MYHC
ma-17c-15-03-2026
CHIA CHENG WEE
21 May 2026
MYHC
ma-23ncvc-3-03-2025
KHAREN JIT KAUR A/P LA CHIN SINGH v 1. ) NUURUL 'AZMI BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN 2. ) FAZNITA BINTI MOHD SALLEH
2 April 2026
MYHC
w-02a-60-01-2023
HOW CHEE HONG v 1. ) KAN WENG HIN 2. ) MELVIN SELVAM A/L THAMBIRAJAH 3. ) YIP BENG FATT 4. ) LEMBAGA TATATERTIB PEGUAM BELA & PEGUAM CARA
7 January 2026
MYCOA
b-02a-1132-07-2024
LIM KIEN HUAT v 1. ) HO SHEN LEE (M) SDN BHD (Dalam Liquidasi) 2. ) TAN KEN MENG 3. ) KHOO CHUN FUN 4. ) MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA
22 September 2025
MYCOA
aa-17d-1-07-2024
SAKTHIVEL NAGALINGAM OF MESSRS AMRAN JOSEPH CHAN & CO. v KUMARAPPAN @ THANNIRMALAI A/L K. M. PALANIAPPAN PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA
2 July 2025
MYHC
wa-24ncvc-512-02-2024
RAJA NOR HISHAM BINTI RAJA HIZAT v NUR SYUHADA BINTI ISMAIL (beramal sebagai TETUAN SYUHADA ISMAIL & CO)
16 December 2024
MYHC
wa-17d-7-01-2023
ENDLESS CORPORATE SDN. BHD. v YEOH ENG KONG
28 February 2024
MYHC
wa-17d-22-07-2022
NORDIN BIN KASSIM v MURALLITHARAN A/L MUNISAMY PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM
24 September 2023
MYHC
02f-12-03-2018w
MAJLIS PEGUAM CECIL WILBERT MOHANARAJ ABRAHAM
28 March 2019
MYFC
02f-65-10-2015w
1. DINESH KANAVAJI A/L KANAWAGI 2. KANAWAGI A/L SEPERUMANIAM v RAGUMAREN A/L N. GOPAL PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM
27 November 2017
MYFC
02f-55-08-2015b
Majlis Peguam Malaysia v 1. Rajehgopal a/l Velu 2. Ganashaligham a/l Rajah
28 June 2017
MYFC