Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
RELEVAN
~Aung San Suu Kyi~
Issue No. 2/08 PP8492/09/2009(021976) December 2008
A Publication of the Kuala Lumpur Bar
"Concepts such as truth, justice and compassion cannotbe dismissed as trite when these are often the only bulwarks
which stand against ruthless power."
2 • editorial
A publication of the Kuala Lumpur Bar
Issue No. 2/08
Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee 2008/09
ChairmanRavindra Kumar a/l G Rengasamy
MembersBrendan Navin Siva (Hon. Secretary)Anand PonnuduraiDatuk N. SivananthanLee ShihDipendra Harshad RaiDahlia Lee Wooi MienSanjeev Kumar RasiahLai Chee HoeRichard Wee Thiam SengAbdul Rashid IsmailRavindran NekooReggie Wong Mew Sum
Representative to the Bar CouncilSteven Thiru
Editorial Board 2008/09
EditorLee Shih
MembersRichard Wee (Deputy Editor)Brendan Navin SivaCheng Poh HengNicole Fiona Wee Sue-RenYudistra Darma DoraiShanmuga KanesalingamSudharsanan ThillainathanSukhjit Kaur GillAudrey Quay Sook LynSaravana KumarMansoor SaatChan Su-LiDipendra Harshad RaiPetrina Tan Tjin Yi
Relevan welcomes and invites articles, letters and other contributions from readers. However, the Editorial Board reserves the right to edit or not to publish any such article, letter or contribution. All articles, letters or other contributions should be forwarded (preferably via email or CD) to:
The EditorRELEVAN
Kuala Lumpur Bar CommiteeTingkat 8, Wisma Kraftangan,
No. 9, Jalan Tun Perak,50050 Kuala Lumpur
All views, unless expressly stated to be that of the Commitee or the Editorial Board, are the individual writer’s personal Views.
Relevan is the newsletter of the Kuala Lumpur Bar and is published by the
Kuala Lumpur Bar CommiteeTingkat 8, Wisma Kraftangan,
No. 9, Jalan Tun Perak,50050 Kuala Lumpur.
Printed by: PRINCOMAS SDN. BHD. (498036-P)
No. 291 & 292, Jalan KIP 3, Taman Perindustrian KIP,52200 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: 03-6277 1120
ON THE COVER Quote taken from Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s essay entitled ‘Freedom from Fear’. The full essay can be found at: http://www.dassk.com/contents.php?id=416
We Are Missing The Big Picture...After a long hiatus, lawyers now have two e-groups to discuss variouslegal related issues again. The Rostrum and Lawyer’s Talk are google e-mail groups set up specifically to provide those in Malaysian legal circles with an avenue to exchange views and network with each other.
Two discussion threads in those groups provide a suitable backdrop to the thrust of our editorial in this issue.
In the Rostrum, Fahri Azzat’s “Meditation about Moving by an Occasional Mover1” prompted an outpouring of nostalgic reminiscences on the “good old days”, when the call to the Bar was a unique event celebrated by pupil and the entire legal fraternity and an occasion full of grace, camaraderie and good humour.
There was little discussion, however, on how inadequately we train new lawyers compared to other jurisdictions, nor the extent to which provisions dealing with pupillage in the Legal Profession Act 1976 are out of touch with the reality of modern legal practice.
Over at Lawyer’s Talk, Roger Tan’s request for views on whether the “NoDiscount Rule” for conveyancing transactions ought to be retainedprompted a robust discussion. In the main, most people were talking about the need to establish a reasonable fee structure and lamenting on the
ContentsState Authority’s Consent for Conveyance ofProperty to a Non-MalaysianBy Ally Chong Wai Kuan 4 - 5
Are We There Yet?By Brendan Navin Siva 6 - 8
KL Bar Environmental Law Committee’s Visit toCoastal Protection Sites in Port DicksonBy Maria Mohd Harris 9 - 11
Body SearchBy Richard Wee Thiam Seng 12 - 13
Charity Nite - RM100,000 and CountingBy H R Dipendra 14 - 15
The Common Bar CourseBy Steven Thiruneelakandan 16 - 18
Undertaking Comprehensive Judicial ReformBy Brendan Navin Siva 20 - 22
Legal UpdatesBy Sukhjit Gill 23
Book Review: Criminal Litigation ProcessBy Jagjit Singh 24 - 25
1 The article, for the curious, can also be viewed here: http://www.loyarburok.com/?p=335
3 • editorial
“greed” of lawyers, bankers, developers and the publicrespectively. Many vehemently denounced lawyers who gave discounts, portraying them asunprofessional, greedy and treacherous.
In this discussion, the larger issue looms on whether or not the practice of law remains a profession in every aspect of its practice.
Many would consider that nowadays, theconveyancing lawyer is in fact a special sort ofb u s i n e s s m a n s e l l i n g a c o m m o d i t y ( t h edocumentation) with the accompanying services in order for his customer (only sometimes considered a “client”) to obtain an efficient transfer of ownership in property.
Lawyers need to realise that in the not-too-distantfuture, much conveyancing work will undoubtedly be done without lawyers at all. A portent of things to come is the already prevalent practice of bank retail loan documentation arriving at the solicitorsattending to the transaction pre-printed with all variable information already filled up automatically through a computerised mechanism. The solicitor’s role becomes virtually mechanical in the vast majority of cases. How long will it be before the banks decide that it is more cost efficient for them to themselves buy insurance rather than relying on the lawyer’sinsurance and bypass the solicitor totally?
Professor Richard Susskind has painted a bleakpicture on the future of the legal industry in his book “The End of Lawyers? Rethinking the Nature of Legal Services.2” In essence, he argues that in the very near future, lawyers can no longer expect to have amonopoly on many of the jobs considered theirexclusive domain. The lawyer will have to become more multi-disciplinary and more skilled in order to provide the legal services of the future.
The noted New York Times columnist, ThomasFriedman, in his seminal book “The World is Flat” gives various examples of the realignment ofindustries in an increasingly globalised world.Although nuanced, his most fundamental theory is that most basic services will be outsourced tojurisdictions with low costs leaving only high end nichework to be done in most developed or near developed countries. An example is given of an Indian company which provides outsourced services to magic circlelegal firms from New York and London.
2 Extracts from his book can be found at the Times Online website: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/system/topicRoot/The_End_of_Lawyers/3 See further, “Invasion? Imminent!” by K Shanmuga in Relevan, January 2005
Contrast these vast forces of globalisation reshaping the world economy with the current, much outdated, mindset and regulatory framework in whichMalaysian lawyers find themselves.
Lawyers in Malaysia cannot practice through limited companies or any of the other innovations in the way businesses are run (such as limited liabilitypartnerships or law corporations) found in otherjurisdictions. Lawyers are unable to fully advertise their professional services and are constrained by strict rules on the information they are able to publish in anyprofessional publicity. The electronic provision of legal services is banned.
Yet, lawyers in certain instances (e.g. will writing, trade mark registration, company secretarial services) compete directly against non-lawyers who are able to arrange themselves into limited liability companies, advertise without restriction and adopt innovative methods of business (such as using online methods to provide their services).
Lawyers in Sabah and Sarawak refuse to open their borders to competition from even lawyers from the Peninsular, but the Malaysian Bar and theGovernment have been talking about opening borders to foreign lawyers. In considering the manner in which foreign law firms can practice, traditional methodsalready used (and failed) in other jurisdictions (notably the Joint Law Venture which proved to be of limited success in Singapore) appear to be the only mode of foreign lawyer entry to Malaysia. Apparently, noconsideration is given to the knock-on effects to other law firms to have a set of super law firms, enriched with the resources of their foreign partners, but still competing with normal law firms for run-of-the-mill legal work3.
All of this paints a picture of a Bar that is so consumed with the present problems of their practice that they are unable to grasp the sea of change that we will be facing in the years to come. Instead of catching up with other countries, it is time for us to take aparadigm shift in reconsidering our roles in society and the manner in which we practice our profession.
Instead of being ravaged by the forces ofglobalisation, let us embrace them and make change work for us rather than against us.
4 • article
chose in action, from the date of the notice, and all legal and other remedies for the same, and the power to give a good discharge for the same, without the concurrence of the assignor.”
To establish an assignment, three elements must first be fulfilled:- 1. Firstly, the assignment is in respect of a debt or a chose in action; 2. Secondly, the assignment must be in writing under the hand of the assignor, followed by an express notice of assignment; and 3. Finally, the assignment must be absolute and must not purport to be by way of a charge.
The Federal Court in the case of Nouvau Mont Dor (M) Sdn Bhd v Faber Development Sdn Bhd [1984] 2 MLJ 268 had the occasion to interpret section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956. The Federal Court held that if an assignment was absolute and did not purport to be by way of a charge within the ambit of section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956,
then only the assignee wasentitled to sue.
Likewise, the Court of Appeal in Pancaran Nilam (M) Sdn Bhd v Malayan Banking Bhd [2000] 4 CLJ 793 held that where anassignment was absolute, theassignee should have all of the
assignor’s rights, title to and interests in the property which is the subject of the sale and purchase agreement.
A question then arises, at what point in time does aNon-citizen Purchaser obtain all the rights, title to andinterest in the property which is the subject of the sale and purchase agreement? At the point of signing the sale and purchase agreement or at the point when the StateAuthority Consent is granted?
The Crucial Section: Section 433B of the National Land Code 1965Section 433B of the National Land Code 1965 (“the Code”) provides as follows:
“(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other written law-
(a) a non-citizen or a foreign company may acquire land...by way of a disposal under Division II;
State Authority’s Consent for Conveyance of Property to a Non-MalaysianAlly Chong Wai Kuan examines the extent non-Malaysian citizens can assign their rights and title in a property to a financial institution pending State Authority consent.
IntroductionThe Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1965 is the main statute that regulates all the rights and obligations relating to the conveyance of a property from a housing developer to a purchaser.
A Schedule H Agreement is the standard sale and purchase agreement for all sales ofproperties referred to as a“highrise property”, whereas a Schedule G Agreement is for landed properties. The recently introduced Schedule I and J Agreements are meant for transactions of acompleted property, with the purchase price to be paid to the Developer within the stipulated time thereto.
Currently, the law allows for a non-Malaysian citizenpurchaser (“Non-citizen Purchaser”) to enter into a sale and purchase agreement for property and to concurrently seek the approval of the State Authority (“StateAuthority Consent”) in respect of the transaction. In most instances the Developer will progressively bill the said Non-citizen Purchaser after the State AuthorityConsent is obtained.
At the same time, the Non-citizen Purchaser may seek a loan from a financial institution to complete the said sale and purchase transaction.
This article intends to examine the extent that a Non-citizen Purchaser is able to assign their rights and title and any other interests whatsoever in the property to a financial institution pending theapproval of the State Authority.
The AssignmentSection 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 states:-
“Any absolute assignment, by writing, under the hand of the assignor, not purporting to be by way of charge only, of any debt or other legal chose in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the as signor would have been entitled to receive or claim the debt or chose in action, shall be, and be deemed to have been, effectual in law, subject to all equities which would have been entitled to priority over the right of the assignee under the law as it existed in the State before the date of the coming into force of this Act, to pass and transfer the legal right to the debt or
“...what point in time does a non-citizen assignor obtain
all the rights, title to andinterest in the property?”
5 • article
(b) a dealing under Division IV with respect to alienated land or an interest in alienated land may be effected in favour of a non-citizen or a foreign company;
(c) alienated land, or any share or interest in such land, may be transferred or transmitted to, or vested in, or created in favour of any person or body as “trustee”, or of two or more persons or bodies as “trustees”, where the trustee or one of the trustees, or where the beneficiary or one of the beneficiaries, is a non-citizen or a foreign com pany; (d) the Registrar may in respect of any land register any person or body as “representative” or make a memorial in favour of any person or body as “rep resentative” if such person or body is a non-citizen or a foreign company; (e) the Registrar may endorse any memorial of transmission on the register document of title to any land in favour of a non-citizen or foreign company,
but only after the prior approval of the StateAuthority has been obtained upon an application in writing to the State Authority by such non-citizen or foreign company.... (Emphasis added)”
At the time of executing the sale and purchase agreement, the Non-citizen Purchaser may possess a right to theagreement, a right to purchase the property, a right to the agreement to purchase however these are not absolute rights as he/she only has a conditional right to purchase the property prior to the receipt of the written approval of the State Authority.
Section 433E(1) of the Code further provides that “subject to any written law, a person or body desiring to convey or dispose of, in a manner other than those specified in subsection (1) of section 433B, any alienated land or any interest therein to a non-citizen or a foreign company may be allowed to do so, but only after the prior approval of the State Authority has been obtained....”
Section 433C of the Code provides that any disposal of land by the State Authority, or any dealing or other act with regard to alienated land or any interest therein incontravention of section 433B of the Code shall be null and void.
Ally Chong
The intention of section 433B of the Code is crystal clear - it restricts the ownership of land by a non-citizen or a foreign company. In Jalaludeen a/l Abdul Aziz vThrumalingam a/l S Rajadurai & Anor [2002] 1 MLJ 237, the transaction was held to be in contravention of section 433B(1)(b) of the Code as the prior approval of the State Authority had not been obtained by the plaintiff who was a Non-citizen Purchaser. As such, the transaction was null and void by reason of section 433C of the Code.
Therefore, no one should be allowed or be able tocircumvent section 433B of the Code. The Code makes it clear that a Non-citizen Purchaser is not allowed toacquire land unless he/she has received the State Authority Consent.
In conclusion, any attempt by a Non-citizen Purchaser to assign absolutely the rights, title to and interest in a prop-erty which is the subject of a standard sale and purchase agreement in favour of a bank-assignee prematurely (i.e. before the State Authority Consent has been obtained) is to pre-empt section 433B of the Code and thus such an assignment will be null and void.
“...a Non-citizen Purchaser is not allowed to acquire land unless he / she has received
the State Authority consent.”
NOTICE
17TH ANNUAL
GENERAL MEETING
KUALA LUMPUR BAR
NOTICE is hereby given that the
17TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING of
the KUALA LUMPUR BAR will be held
on THURSDAY, 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 at
2:00 P.M. at the GRAND BALLROOM,
THE LEGEND HOTEL, 9th Floor, Putra
Place (The Mall), Kuala Lumpur.
The Committee urges all members of
the Kuala Lumpur Bar to attend this
meeting.
6 • article
Americas, 300 in Asia and 500 in Europe. Its website iscomprehensive in the availability of information about its services, its offices and its staff, along with acomprehensive archiving of all its publications and news reports.
But what struck me as most interesting was that the (US)Supreme Court and Appellate Practice Division of Mayer Brown maintains its own website Appellate.net <www.appellate.net>. Apart from the normal description of their services and the profile of their appellate attorneys, the website contains links to all the official websites of thevarious appellate courts as well as the judgments delivered by the said courts. It also makes readily available a treasure trove of articles written by their leading attorneys. Some of the articles on appellate advocacy are extremely insightful. This is not what impressed me the most. Appellate.net also contains a list of all Mayer Brown’s Supreme Court cases, together with a link to the transcripts of the arguments and briefs in those cases. Where possible, audio feeds of the oral arguments are also made available.
What does this mean to Malaysian lawyers? It means that if you wanted to learn the art of appellate advocacy, you are not merely restricted to reading material about it.Neither are you restricted to driving 45 minutes toPutrajaya to hear submissions of counsel in the Palace of Justice. With the right dose of imagination and interest, you could easily find yourself spending a day or two in the US Supreme Court in Washington D.C., listening to oral arguments by some of the highest paid “attorneys” in the world, complete with the banter and interjection of the Supreme Court Justices. All this without even having to leave your doorstep.
How far down the road is the day when a lawyer in Ipoh or Kota Bharu can switch on a computer in the office and hear the latest arguments in the Federal Court on a point that interests him or her? The technology required is not high end. It can be made available and it is not expensive. Do we need to wait 5 or 10 years?
Incidentally, Mayer Brown is one of the primary sponsors of the Oyez Project <www.oyez.org> - a project started and operated by Professor Jerry Goldman of Northwestern University. Its main objectives are to make the work of the US Supreme Court accessible to everyone through text,images, audio and video. The Oyez Project is a multimedia archive which includes an initiative to create a complete and authoritative audio recording database of all cases
ARE WE THERE YET ?Brendan Navin Siva highlights some interesting legal trends from other jurisdictions and how legal practice in Malaysia can benefit from some of these trends.
Malaysian law firms have generally lagged behind their counterparts overseas in terms of efficiency, productivity, organisation, innovativeness and sheer competitiveness in terms of salaries and remuneration packages, not tomention resources. Those who have spent some timeworking in law firms in the United States, United Kingdom or Australia say that we may well be 5 to 10 years behind.
I believe that it is therefore worth highlighting some of the trends developing overseas to see what the future holds for us and to act as food for thought as to whether we are moving in the right direction. This is of course not an exhaustive guide to what is out there - it is merely theramblings of someone who spent a few hours surfing the Net during one particularly severe bout of procrastinitis.
Website ContentIn terms of website presentation, there doesn’t seem to be a significant difference between most websites of law firms overseas and in Malaysia. Although most law firms overseas appear to allocate substantial funds for thecreation and development of their respective websites, it would appear that the conservative and traditionalapproach is still the most common prevailing approach to online presentation.
Malaysian law firms that have embraced websites as anadditional means of communicating with their clients and to promote the services they offer do not appear to lagbehind significantly in terms of presentation. This is, of course, after having factored in differences in publicityrestrictions which regulate how and what a Malaysian law firm can do and say in promoting and publicising their services.
But it is in content that I believe overseas law firm websites differ greatly from ours. There are many examples toillustrate the point. I will highlight only one.
The website of Mayer Brown <www.mayerbrown.com> makes the claim that it is a leading global law firm withoffices in key business centers across the Americas, Asia and Europe, with approximately 1,000 lawyers in the
“But it is in content that I believe overseas law firms differ greatly from ours.”
7 • article
since the introduction of an audio recording system inOctober 1955. For those of us who have participated in one way or another in the recent trial period for theproposed transcription services in our courts, it is sobering to discover that we are doing now what American lawyers started doing more than 50 years ago.
For those who lack the required imagination to get into the mood for the audio recordings and need to be visually aroused, the Oyez Project also offers a virtual reality tour of certain sections of the Supreme Court Building and, if you fancy a peek, the chambers of some of the Judges.
Public Disclosure of InformationThere are no laws that require public disclosure of thefinancial information of law firms in Malaysia. So too in the United Kingdom. Seeking to stand out from the crowd, Clifford Chance has released an Annual Review for theperiod 1 May 2007 to 30 April 2008 (seewww.c l i f fo rdchance .com/pdf /cc_annua l rev iew.pdf?LangID=UK&).
The Annual Review is set out in a framework notsubstantially different from that of the Annual Reports of public listed companies. It contains a summary of its more notable achievements and work done. It alsocontains a summary of the structure of the law firm and its overall governance. And, most strikingly, it contains a summary of the audited statutory consolidated financial statements of the law firm for the year ended 30 April 2008. Revenue of £1,329,000,000-00. Profit before tax of£478,000,000-00. Average profit per equity partner of £1,156,000-00.
What is the reasoning for this bold move? The officialreasoning appears in the opening pages of the Annual Review - “In recent years our clients have been responding to growing demand for open and transparent disclosure of the way their businesses operate, how they are managed and how well they are performing. This demand has come not only from regulators and investors but from a broad spectrum of stakeholders including employees, customers, suppliers, NGOs, the media and neighbouring communities.
Although we are not required to produce an annual report at present, we are aware that there is growing interest in what we are doing and the thinking behind it. In today’s climate of greater business openness, it seems appropriate for us to begin reporting regularly to interested stakeholders and also to publish a corporate responsibility report.
As we succeed in our strategy of building a truly global law firm, these reports provide an opportunity to show the big picture of how we operate as a single firm worldwide and how this benefits our clients and
our people.”
Is this the way of the future? Food for thought?
Law ReformNearly all the common law jurisdictions have in the last 10 to 15 years undertaken a wholesale review of theirsystem of administration of justice and implementedconcrete measures to improve the efficiency, integrity and productivity of their respective legal systems.
The latest is the work of the Victoria Law ReformCommission - the “Civil Justice Review Report” (see http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au). Released on 28 May 2008, the Report is the product of 18 months work and contains a comprehensive review of the Victorian civil justice system. It contains proposals designed to “reduce the time taken to resolve disputes, reduce costs and simplify the process of civil litigation”.
The Report is 758 pages long. To say that the Report is comprehensive would be an understatement.
Some of the more relevant recommendations made by the Commission include the introduction of pre-actionrequirements for communication and exchange ofinformation between potential litigants; the introduction of new statutory standards to govern conduct of litigants so as to accelerate disclosure of information, encourage greater co-operation and limiting of the issues in dispute; the increase of alternative dispute resolution; to establish more proactive judicial management of litigation; toimplement early and cost-effective modes of disclosure(including pre-trial oral examinations, etc); and to enhance judicial control over expert witnesses and expert evidence (including enabling a single expert to be appointed or to direct expert witnesses to confer and attempt a jointreport).
The fact that it is time for Malaysia to undertake a similarly comprehensive review of both the civil and criminaljustice systems is painfully apparent without the need to look overseas. But with there being so much evidence of committed and focussed law reform efforts overseas, it begs the question why we have not even started?
“Nearly all the common lawjurisdictions have in the last 10
to 15 years undertaken awholesale review of their system of administration of justice...”
8 • article
eConvenyancingAnother fellow procrastinator (who does not wish to be named) also alerted me to this interesting development. The Law Society of Ireland has come up with a proposal to place the entire conveyancing process on an electronic platform. On 22 July 2008, the eConveyancing proposal was launched – “Back to Basic Principles. Vision of anElectronic System of Covenyancing” (see www.lawsociety.ie/UserFiles/File/Publication%20of%20eVision.pdf)
It is the product of 3 years ofresearch and consultation. Its primary recommendation is a call forl e g i s l a t i v e , p ro c e d u r a l a n dadministrative reform to bring the conveyancing process back to its basics. Having examined theconveyancing process in otherjurisdictions, the Law Society ofIreland contends that these other jurisdictions appear to have made what it regards to be a fundamental mistake - merely electronifying their existing paper systems, instead of re-engineering the whole process to suit the electronic and on-line environment.
The Law Society of I re land predicts that i f theeConveyancing proposal can be successfully implemented, the total transaction time could be 5 working days.
The proposal is said to be intended to provide a framework for discussion and to stimulate other stakeholders toexamine the processes of the present conveyancing system and to initiate changes required to facilitateeConveyancing. Should this not also create or stimulate discussions in Malaysia? It goes without saying that such a proposal - if feasible in our local environment - would be a huge step forward.
Retaining Legal Talent In an article in the Australian Financial Review entitled “Young Lawyers’ Loyalty Comes at a Price” dated 15August 2008, it was highlighted that the larger law firms in Australia have recently introduced, in varying degrees,structured formal bonus schemes for the younger lawyers in an effort to retain legal talent.
These schemes set clear and tangible performance targets across a range of measures and provided clarity andcertainty for the lawyers to work towards, in contrast to the traditional model of making bonus payments on a purely discretionary basis. The law firms appear to be constrained to match the formalised structures of the multinational corporations and financial institutions to avoid losing their best people to these entities.
It would also appear that some of the law firms modified their bonus schemes in response to a growing demand from their young lawyers to have a clearer link between
Brendan Navin Siva
“Are We There Yet”[continued from page 7]
performance and reward, so that they knew upfrontexactly what they needed to achieve in order to secure such financial reward.
This would seem to be logical. A purely discretionarybonus scheme for lawyers has always been the prevailing way in Malaysia. But it is arguable that it has created an atmosphere of uncertainty amongst employees who have no real indication of the manner in which their bonus
payments were arrived at, even though they may have been provided in advance c lear and exactperformance targets to meet, either financial or non-financial. It would appear that there is never an exact formula that then links thoseperformance targets to the quantum of monetary reward a lawyer would receive in return. It also sometimes
breeds resentment, especially when the system is ad-hoc and bias towards certain favoured employees. In thisregard, a formalised reward scheme may be the wayforward. Time to stop rambling on. If anyone is aware of any other developments or trends overseas that Malaysian lawyers ought to consider or think about, please let us know by emailing us at [email protected]
“...larger law firms in Australia have recently introduced...structured formal bonus schemes for the younger lawyers ...”
Do you receive Emails from the KL Bar?The KL Bar Committee issues emails
to members as and when there are
issues that arise or information is
received that would be beneficial
to members including activities of
the KL Bar. If you do not presently
receive emails from the KL Bar
Committee, please send an email
to [email protected] or fax
(03-2691 1090) providing your name,
place of practice and email address.
This will be duly processed so that
you will be updated by email on all the
matters set out above.
9 • article
Report on Technical Visit to Coastal Protection Sites in Port Dickson on 18.10.2008 jointly organized by Kuala Lumpur Bar’s Environmental Law Committee and the Water Resources Technical Division,Institution of Engineers (“IEM”), Malaysia.
The technical visit was conducted by En. Nor Hisham Mohd Ghazali, former Head of Design Unit, Coastal Protection Division, Jabatan Parit dan Saliran Malaysia and was well attended by 7 members of Kuala Lumpur Bar and 2registered non-members, together with 8 members ofIEM. We departed by coach from IEM building in Petaling Jaya at 8.30 a.m. and completed the visit by 4 p.m.
A. Bagan Pinang BeachWe had an introduction and briefing session by En. Nor Hisham upon arrival at Bagan Pinang beach at 10.00 a.m. Our first stop was at the beach in front of the Straits ViewHotel at Batu 2.This was the starting point of the PortDickson Beach Nourishment Project completed in 2006. The beach nourishment project introduced 60 metres of additional beach berm to the existing beach. The project also included a drainage improvement component in that at Batu 2, the Sg. Saguni outlet was reconstructed toimprove flushing.
We then walked along the beach southwards towardsBagan Pinang food court for the second stop of the tour. South of Bagan Pinang, the food court, a dive shop, BalaiRakyat and some apartments were at one point threatened
by erosion as a result of wave attacks which caused the movement of material seawards and lowered the beach beginning from a dive shop and the food court to thechalets just before Avillion Hotel & Resort. Temporary measures were employed and these included thebuilding of seawalls and gabions1, yet these had failed due to a combination of poor construction of seawalls,scouring2 and undermining3.
Beach RenourishmentBeach renourishment, spanning the areas from Bagan Pinang to Pantai Saujana, was then introduced byimporting sand from the offshore beach thereby raising the shorefront and resulting in the creation of a “new beach”.
Backshore DrainageDrainage outfall4 from the dive shop and food court, which used to be discharged onto the beach, was re-channeled into the underground drains and thereafter discharged at a single main outfall. This kept the beach free from surface flows which would have created runnels5 and reduced the beauty of the beach. As a result of both the beachrenourishment and underground drainage system, the structures mentioned above as well as Avillion Hotel &Resort benefited from the scheme and the beach is now wide and clean.
LandscapingThe landscaping was a recent introduction to the beach nourishment project and has twofold objectives - byplanting selected trees and grass turfing at the backshore of nourished area this will help in preserving the sand and limiting its transport by wind and extreme wave seawards.
1 Gabions are cylindrical wicker or metal basket for filing with earth or stones.2 Scouring - clearing out by flushing through with a pipe, channel, etc.3 Undermining - wearing away the base or foundation (of river, etc)4 Outfall is the mouth of the drain, where it empties into the sea.5 Runnels - Gutter
KL Bar Environmental Law Committee’s Visit to Coastal Protection Sites in Port DicksonMaria Mohd Haris presents a report on the technical visit to coastal protection sites in Port Dickson organised on 18 October 2008.
10 • article
C. Saujana Beach, Fourth mileAt 11.00 a.m., we arrived at Saujana Beach.
This is the straightest shoreline and was filled withcasuarinas trees. It was first renourished in 1994 and again in 2004 by adding 60 metres of berm length.
Underground drainage was built to contain the effluent and sullage8 discharges from nearby shoplots by directing them to Sungai Sri Rusa while the surface run-off wascollected in gravel drains underneath the backshore and discharged sideways at the end point of the beach.
D. Sri Cahaya Beach (Pulau Sri Rusa)At 11.20 a.m., we arrived at Sri Cahaya Beach.
An artificial headland was built in 1991 (by creating an “arch”) and has the effect of slowing the impact of strong waves thereby creating a calm area opposite the small islet (Pulau Sri Rusa).
The headland connects to a small islet which forms a “Y” shape. The islet is a small mangrove area, popular withanglers. A low revetment9 was also built using granite stones to keep the nourished sand from completelyinundating the islet.
The landscape also provides shade for local beachgoers preferring shady areas to lay their mats, unlike the western counterparts who prefer to “bathe” in the sun.
An assortment of coastal species such as Jambu Laut plants and palm trees were planted, less for aesthetic value but more for making the area seem natural and blend in with the surrounding.
B. The Mini-MarinaAt 10.30 a.m., we arrived at the mini-marina. This is an area behind Pulau Burong, which is a small mangrove islet6 and it is built by JPS to enable fishermen to berth their boats.
This mini-marina is circular in shape and possibly the first of its kind in the country. The shape allows for greater space to the 30 or so local fishermen for the purpose of berthing and also for security reasons. Furthermore, the location of the mini-marina, behind Pulau Burong provides anadditional shelter to the fishermen from strong waves.
By containing the boats within the mini-marina, problems of haphazard berthing along the channel by the fishermen, as well as the competing usages of the nourished beach with beachgoers, were solved all at once.
Breakwaters7 were also built to protect against storm waves.
6 Islet is a small island.7 Breakwaters are barriers built into the sea to break the force of waves.8 Sullage is filth, refuse, sewage.9 Revetment is a retaining wall or facing of masonry etc.
“KL Bar Environmental Law Committee’s Visit to Coastal Protection Sites in Port Dickson”[continued from page 9]
11 • article
The effect of BMS is that it keeps the water level of the beach low and increases the compactness of the beach sand.
As a result of BMS, Selesa Hotel had benefited from the clean beach.
This Report dated 16h December 2008 was prepared by Maria Mohd Haris and amended by En. Nor Hisham MohdGhazali for Kuala Lumpur Bar’s Environmental LawCommittee. The visit was made possible with theassistance of IEM and the writer wishes to extend hergratitude to IEM & KL Bar.
Any error or omission by the writer is entirely her own.
E. Selesa Hotel Beach/Beach Management SystemAt noon, we arrived at Selesa Hotel beach.
This is the site for the first successful Beach Management System (“BMS”) on the west coast. BMS works on theprinciple that an unsaturated / drained beach is lesssusceptible to erosion, and it is being described as “adrainage system underneath the beach”.
Underneath the beach lies some porous10 pipes wrapped in geotextile11. Geotextile acts as a filter / separatorkeeping the sand from entering the drainage pipes and choking the drainage system.
Beach water is drained by gravity to a sump12.
When the water level reaches a certain pre-set point,automatic pumps are activated by sensors and the water is drained out through an outlet at one end of the beach.
Two pumps are installed and designed to functionalternately to prevent overworking the system.
10 Porous - letting through water.11 Geotextile - Woven clothes/mesh used for strengthening the porous pipe.12 Sump - pit, hole, well.
Maria Mohd Harris
12 • article
Body SearchRichard Wee Thiam Seng looks at the new provisions in the criminal procedure code dealing with the right of the police to conduct a body search.
Continuing on from my earlier article (in Relevan Issue No. 1/08) on section 28A of the Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) which dealt with the right of a person to contact a lawyer when detained by the police, I wish to now focus on the provisions governing the right of the police toconduct a body search pursuant to section 20A of the CPC. Similar to section 28A of the CPC, this new section 20A was added into the CPC by the Criminal Code(Amendment) Act 2006.
Section 20A of the CPC states: “ (1) Any search of a person shall comply with the procedure on body search as specified in the Fourth Schedule of this Code.
(2) Notwithstanding any written law, the provisions of the Fourth Schedule shall apply to any search of a person conducted by any officer of any enforcement agency conferred with the power of arrest or search of a person under any law.
(3) The Minister charged with the responsibility for internal security and public order may amend the Fourth Schedule by order published in the Gazette.”
History behind the addition of Section 20AWe must recall the events that led to the addition ofsection 20A of the CPC. In 2005, a video recording was made from a mobile phone of a woman forced to strip ina police station, and who was instructed to repeatedlysquat. This video caused so much outrage that theGovernment established a Royal Commission toinvestigate, inter alia the video recording and theallegations of police abuse of arrested persons at police stations. The findings of the Royal Commission led to the numerous amendments in the CPC as per the 2007 Amendments Act to the CPC
How does Section 20A operate?The new section 20A of the CPC refers to the Fourth Schedule of the CPC (“the Fourth Schedule”) whichelaborates on the extent of the powers of the police to conduct a body search. To quote the entire FourthSchedule of the CPC would take up too much space in Relevan, and so I would urge you to refer the same in the
latest version of the CPC.
A body search is not compulsory1 as per the FourthSchedule, but can only be carried out if it complies with the following objectives:- 1. To obtain incriminating evidence related to the offence of which the accused person was arrested for.
2. To seize contraband, the proceeds of the crime or other things criminally possessed or used in conjunction with the offence the accused person was arrested for.
3. To discover evidence related to the reason of the arrest or to preserve the said evidence or prevent disposal of the same.
Interestingly, while section 20A of the CPC is silent on this point, section 1 of the Fourth Schedule makes it clear that a body search can only take place after arrest. Therefore, the police cannot conduct a body search on a person who has not been arrested. If one is merely being questioned, no body search can be carried out.
Types of Body SearchThere are 4 types of body searches, as set out and defined in sections 2, 4, 7, 10, and 13 of the Fourth Schedule :-
1. Pat down search - outer clothing search which is carried out by quickly running down the hands over the outer garments.
2. Strip search - this search involves removal of a person’s clothing in part or in full.
“... a body search can only take place
after arrest.”
1 Section 1(1) of the Fourth Schedule states:- “1. (1) A body search may be conducted on a person arrested only if it complies with any of the following objectives”
13 • article
Another interesting case is the English High Courtdecision of Mustapha Osman v Southwark Crown Court[1999] EWHC Admin 622, decided on 1 July 1999, where it was held that a body search conducted by 2 police officers who failed to properly identify themselves to the persons searched as per the Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (“PACE”), was in breach of section 2(3) of the same Act. The High Court overturned the Crown Court’s decision and released the accused person on that ground alone.Justice Collins in discussing the body search provisions under PACE and the protection it gives to the people in relation to body searches by the police said this:-
“This is, no doubt, because Parliament has recognised that a search of a person is a serious interference with his liberty, and all proper safeguards must be followed. The facts found show that there was no reason why
the officers could not have given the necessary information. It is not for the court to disapply the duties set out in the Act, but only to decide whether, in a given set of circumstances, the officers have taken all reasonable steps to do what Parliament has required them to do. I emphasise that we are not concerned with the admissibility of evidence found as a result of a search, but whether the search itself was lawful, so that the officers were acting in the execution of their duty when carrying it out.”
It is hoped that with the new Fourth Schedule, which lays down extensive grounds and rules of conducting a body search, the Courts will continue to safeguard the rights to the people. The quote above by Justice Collins would be a good guide, not only to the Courts, but to the police as well.
3. Intimate search – includes the physical examination of a person’s bodily orifices other than the mouth, nose and ears.
4. Intrusive search - as the name suggests, this is an intrusive search to check if the person has hid anything inside that person’s body.
Thus far, I have not come across any reported cases on section 20A of the CPC2. I however foresee challenges by Defence Counsel over body searches as the FourthSchedule has been drafted in rather general terms. One possible challenge is in a situation where an accusedperson has been arrested for Crime A, but after a body search, the evidence thereafter leads to the prosecution of Crime B. Can the charge for Crime B hold water?
In the Privy Council decision of Kuruma v Reginam (1955) 1 All ER 236, Lord Goddard did state that; “the test to be applied in considering whether evidence is admissible is whether it is relevant to the matters in issue. If it is, it is admissible and the court is not concerned with how the evidence was obtained.”
In R v Kelt [1994] 2 All ER 780, the English Court ofAppeal faced a situation where the blood sample of an accused person was extracted for a murder inquiry but the said sample then matched blood found at a robbery scene, unrelated to the murder inquiry. Can that blood sample be adduced as evidence in the robbery case? The Court of Appeal did stress the need for the police to act in good faith when dealing with evidence extracted for one alleged crime but used in another criminal charge. The Court held that the blood sample in that case could be used in the robbery trial, notwithstanding the fact that it was meant for another case.
Richard Wee Thiam Seng
2 As of 16 December 2008, no reported cases were found in the Malayan Law Journal and the Current Law Journal. However, please feel free to inform the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee of any cases reported for that said provision, for our onward amendment to this article.
* The author would like to express his appreciation to law student Yip Xiao Heng who assisted with some of the research for this article.
“... a search of a person is a seriousinterference with his liberty, and all
proper safeguards must be followed.”
14 • event
When the Kuala Lumpur Bar Young Lawyers Committee handed its cheque of RM29,430 to the Pusat Penjagaan Kanak-kanak Cacat Klang last month, it got me thinking. Just how much have we lawyers raised for the variouscharitable homes in the past 4 years? We have had 4editions of the Charity Nite organised by the KL Bar YLC since 2005 and in 2007 and 2008, the Perak, Penang,Johor, Selangor, Melaka and Kelantan State Barsrespectively all got into the Charity Nite action.
The concept of holding a Charity Nite in the Bar calendar began in 2005 when a group of enterprising lawyersorganised the first ever Charity Nite at the Souled Out Café in swanky Hartamas on 30 June 2005. Buoyed by itssuccess (and of course the amount of fun lawyers hadsinging to their hearts content), this immediately became an annual event earmarked for every June as a mid-yearrelief for lawyers from the rigors of work. 2007 saw a record of sorts when not only a sum of RM35,000 was raised for 2 charities, it also saw the inaugural ‘West Coast Charity Nite’ whereby the State Bars of Kuala Lumpur,Perak, Melaka and Johor all simultaneously held theirCharities Nite together. Coupled with the fact that almost
CHARITY NITE - RM100,000 AND COUNTING
1000 lawyers attended the various Charity Nites, neverbefore, indeed, have so many lawyers come together with one love and one heart for charity. The amounts do vary from state to state, but no doubt, as a rough estimate from all monies donated, a sum in excess of RM100,000 was surely disbursed to the various adopted charities.
The modus of the Charity Nite is simple andstraightforward indeed. Often, as is with many charity events, one needs a catalyst to get the atmospherepumping. The hallmark of the Charity Nite has always been the showcasing of our very own extra- legal talent. InKuala Lumpur for example, we have had 2 years of the KL Bar Idol and in 2008, the 1st ever ‘Battle of the Bands’ was organised where the winner is crowned on their ability to reign in the highest amount of pledge. Whilst some of us may not agree with the choice of the ultimate winner, we surely must agree that it is the charity that matters. And of course, we all had a lot of fun.
Organising a Charity Nite event is also not an easy feat. A lot of care goes into the choice of the Charity (and toensure that the Charity is bona fide and thoroughly
H R Dipendra looks back at the success of the Charity Nite over the years and how it should remain a tradition of the Bar.
15 • event
CHARITY NITE - RM100,000 AND COUNTING
H R DipendraChair
KL Bar Young Lawyers Committee
deserves the donation). Choice of venue is also important as the Bar has many sensibilities that require utmost care to be taken so as to ensure no unpleasantness arises. Equally important was to keep the ticket price as low as possible with the maximum amount food and beverage so as to ensure that every lawyer could afford to attend. A lot of volunteers across the Peninsular, in no small way, made the respective Charity Nites a success. Help also came in many ways from assisting with the initial groundwork, toperforming in a band on the night, producing excellent video promos and “harassing” lawyers to pledge during the live performances. These volunteers deserve the Bar’s vote of thanks.
The success of the Charity Nite would not have beenpossible but for the donations made. Many contributing firms and individuals pledged various amounts or money for the event. And the firms and individuals did so with much hope in their hearts that the adopted charities would never have to walk alone. It is fortifying to note that no matter how much we lawyers may disagree over various issues,
at the very least, all of us agree that the success of therespective Charity Nites over the years has been ofparamount importance and with that came all the financial support. To all the volunteer lawyers and sponsors, I salute you!
Looking back, the Charity Nite was created as a socialouting with a noble purpose for lawyers. I dare say itcomplements the other social events in the Bar Calendar like the Annual Dinner and Bar & Bench get-togethers and projected an image of a compassionate Bar. If the truth be told, the Charity Nite has resulted in goodwill for the Bar as a whole over the past 4 years. There are many lawyers with fond memories of this event and can surely attest to this. The goodwill generated from being a responsible and caring Bar will surely sweeten the hearts and soothe the minds of even the most ferocious detractors of the Bar. It is with this belief, and in moving forward, I feel that every possible effort must be made to ensure that the Charity Nite continues as a tradition of the Bar.
16 • q & a
The Common Bar Course
There has been much discourse lately on whether there should be a common examination for all law graduates before they enter the legal profession. The President of the Malaysian Bar, Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevesan, was quoted by the New Sunday Times (April 6, 2006) as saying that there was a need for “...... a common examination for all law graduates entering the legal profession, irrespective of where they had pursued their undergraduate degrees.”
The former Minister of Law in the Prime Minister’sDepartment is reported to have said (in the New Straits Times, May 15, 2006) that “...... the government waslooking into introducing a Bar Vocational Course and whether such a model, practiced in the United Kingdom, could be implemented locally.” Relevan speaks to Steven Thiru, Chairman of the Professional Standards andDevelopment Committee of the Bar Council and a member of the Bar Council’s Ad Hoc Committee on the Common Bar Course, for his views on these developments:-
Do we need a Common Bar Course (“CBC”) as a single entry point into the legal profession in Malaysia?Yes. It would be an important step in our efforts to improve quality at the Bar. It would enable us to deal with the source of the problem, viz, the generaldeterioration in legal education. A uniform training scheme, in the form of the CBC, would certainlycontribute towards enhancing standards.
Is the Bar Council in favour of the CBC,particularly as a replacement of the Certificate of Legal Practice (CLP) and if so, what steps have the Bar Council taken?The Bar Council has advocated for the CBC since the mid 1980’s. We have consistently taken the stand that the CBC should be the ultimate filter for entry into the legal profession. In May this year the Bar Council set up the Ad-Hoc Committee on the CBC. The Committee consist of experienced practitioners1, a senior academician (and formerly a seniorpractitioner)2 and the senior manager (standards) of the Malaysian Qualifications Agency3.
Can you tell us about the work of the BarCouncil’s Ad-Hoc Committee on the CBC?
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
1 Hendon Mohamed, Prasad Abraham, Sheila De Costa, G.K. Ganesan, Ken St. James, Mariette Peters, Murad Ali, Roger Tan, Dato’ Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Nahendran Navaratnam and S.S. Muker2 Adjunct Professor R. Rajeswaran of UiTM3 Dr. Rozlini Mary Fernandez Chung
The Committee’s primary task was to craft thesyllabus and course content for the proposed CBC. In this regard, we were required to also consider and implement, where possible, the position taken by the Bar Council in the various working papers on the CBC. These were prepared between 1989 to 2003 and include the Morrison Report (1989),Seeking Quality: Bar Council’s Memorandum on LegalEducation Reform And Qualifications For Entry Into The Legal Profession (1993), Report on the Review of the CLP (2002) and Bar Council Memorandum OnLegal Education Reform (2003).
Has the Committee completed its work?Yes, we have. We have prepared a draft CBCframework which takes into account the Bar Council’s views over the past two decades. We have also made a number fresh proposals which we believe willrevolutionise legal training and put us on par with other modern schemes the world-over. The draft CBC proposal is, however, still work-in-progress as it is pending approval by the Bar Council. It is to be tabled for debate at our next Council meeting on October 11, 2008.
Can you tell us the approach adopted by the Committee?As a starting point, the Committee considered the prevailing post-graduate professional trainingprogrammes (ie. for advocates and solicitors /barristers and solicitors) in other commonwealthjurisdictions, namely the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore and Canada. The experiences of these other jurisdictions wereuseful as a guideline. However, the Committee did not lose sight of the fact that the profession inMalaysia is fused. Thus, the draft CBC proposal is not a wholesale reproduction of any one of these other jurisdictions (eg. the Bar Vocational Programme in the United Kingdom). The Committee has nevertheless adopted certain critical aspects of these programmes and inculcated them into the draft CBC proposal.
But, will the CBC be just another CLP with a new label?It would not be. We were conscious of the
Steven Thiruneelakandan, Chairman of the Professional Standards and Development Committee of the Bar Council, elaborates on the proposed framework for the Common Bar Course.
17 • q & a
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
weaknesses in the CLP. We found it to be outdated and it certainly does not, in our view, serve therequirements of the modern legal profession. Also, a survey of the developments in the other jurisdictions show that there has been a demonstrable shift infocus to practical training based on experientiallearning and practical / vocational training. The CLP is, regrettably, still largely mired in the old schoolacademic / black-letter law approach sans practical training.
What is the underlying principle for theproposed CBC?The main principle is that it will serve as a single entry point into the legal profession in Malaysia regardless of where the undergraduate qualification is obtained (locally or from foreign universities/colleges of law). There may of course be a list of recognizeduniversities/colleges of law (local and international) which would be determined by the Legal Qualifying Board. This is consistent with the Bar Council’s stand that “......the check on quality will not be attheundergraduate level ie. entry into law schools but at the professional entry level ie. professionalqualifications for entry into the Bar. Thus the final check would be at the entry level into the legalprofession.” (see the Bar Council’s Memorandum On Legal Education Reform of 3.1.2003)
Has the Committee also drawn up the objectives of the proposed CBC?Yes. There are broadly six primary objectives and they are as follows:-
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
The focus of the CBC should be on skills /practical training (as opposed to testing on legal knowledge) to equip the “student-at-law” forlegal practice in Malaysia.
The vocational nature of the training will becomplimented with academic (substantive law)elements, only where necessary. Thus, the CBC will not deal with substantive law, which should remain the domain of the universities / lawcolleges.
The CBC must combine the modern experience of other commonwealth jurisdictions and ourpeculiar requirements (in a fused profession, with the inherent weaknesses).
The CBC should prepare the “student-at-law” for the first two years of practice.
The CBC should also enable the “student-at-law” to choose (if they so desire) to become either an advocate (litigation) or a solicitor (non-litigation). This is achieved by giving the student-at-law the
Q:
A:
Q:A:
Q:
A:
Q:A:
(6)
What would be the course structure for the CBC?We have proposed that the CBC be conducted in five semesters over a period of twenty months (inclusive of pupillage). In this regard, the first three semesters will entail full time study whilst the remaining two semesters will be conducted part-time together with pupillage. Further, Semester 1, 2 and 3 will consists of compulsory subjects. In semesters 4 and 5 (where the “students-at-law” would be undergoing pupillage), there would be a mixture of compulsory subjects and electives. As noted earlier, by their choice of theelectives, the “student-at-law” (now pupil) can start tailoring their training to suit their preferred choice of practice (litigation or non litigation).
Will the CBC be the death knell for pupillage?The Committee is of the view that pupillage should be retained albeit with a reduction in its duration. In this regard, the Committee has proposed that CBC should run partly parallel with pupillage. As stated above, the student-at-law will undertake the CBC on a full-time basis in the first three semesters. They will then begin their pupillage and continue withsemesters four and five of the CBC on a part-time basis. The incorporation of pupillage into the CBC will hopefully deal with some of the shortcomings in the training of our pupils. It will allow pupils to easilycompare the level of training that they are receiving from their masters with their peers. Moreover, if there are weaknesses, the dual effect of “peer-learning” and participation in the part-time CBC programme would provide a safety net.
How would the CBC deal with the crescendo of complaints that we hear about the legalprofession today?It is a matter that we considered carefully. Thus, the first three semesters essentially deal with aptitude, ethical values, basic legal skills and core areas ofpractice. These are the bedrock of legal practice in Malaysia and are intended to ensure that thosecoming into the Bar have the requisite qualities. In this regard, it is envisaged that there should be a stringent assessment system that would sieve out those who do not possess these fundamental requirements. In other words, it is not a given that all “students-at-law” would make the grade and complete the CBC.
What are subjects that the CBC will cover?We have put together an array of subjects that we feel
option to fashion their training to cater for their choice.
The CBC must deal with some of theshortcomings in pupillage and enhance thetraining during pupillage.
18 • q & a
Q:A:
will meet the objectives that I spoke of earlier. In this regard, some of the main subjects that we haveproposed are: Practical Aspects of Malaysian Law, Legal Interpretation Skills (Constitution, Statutes and Case Law) and Practice Management Skills (inSemester 1), Legal Language (English and BahasaMalaysia for law) and Communication Skills (including IT skills), Lawyering Skills (eg. Techniques of analysis) and Practical Legal Research, Legal Ethics andProfessionalism, Business and Solicitors Accounts,Interviewing and Client Counselling Skills, Opinion Writing (in Semester 2) and core subjects such as Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Drafting Skills,Evidence, Real Property Practice, Commercial and Corporate Practice, Introduction to Advocacy,Negotiation Skills, Alternative Dispute Resolution-Mediation and Arbitration (in Semesters 3 and 4)4.Finally, in Semester 5 we have proposed Remedies and Enforcement / Execution Proceedings as well as a host of other electives5.
How do you expect the CBC to be delivered?The Committee has also considered the mode ofdelivery and the assessment system. We havediscovered that most jurisdictions have moved away from the traditional lecture-seminar/tutorial as the mode/s of delivery of the CBC. Thus, the modernapproach (as part of experiential learning) is to have a mixture of lecture-seminar/tutorials, on-line learning, DVD’s, practical and industrial training. This should
Q:
A:
Q:A:
result in cost savings and it would also impact on the logistical requirements for the CBC.
What about the teaching staff and infrastructure to support the CBC?It is envisaged that the teaching staff will consist of qualifi ed members of the Bar, judges (sitting andretired) and qualifi ed academics from the various law faculties / private colleges. There should also beprovision for foreign teaching staff, whether on an ad-hoc or permanent basis. Further, in connection with fi nances, the Bar Council has decided that the CBC should be run on a non-profi t basis. Thus, public funding from the government would be required to set up the necessary infrastructure and to coveradministration costs.
When do you expect the CBC come into place?We anticipate it will take between 4 to 6 years for the CBC to be implemented. This is because,inter-alia, there is a requirement for dedicated course materials, which are presently unavailable. We must also develop a training programme for those who are to be engaged to teach the CBC. As for logistics, in the interim we would need to use the availablefacilities in the law faculties in our public universities in the Klang Valley. However, we must look at apurpose built college (eg. the College of Law, Sydney) to cater for the CBC in the future.
4 Some of the other proposed electives in Semester 4 are Advanced Evidence, Advanced Civil Procedure, Advanced Criminal Procedure, Advanced Real Property Practice, Advanced Corporate and Commercial Practice, Wills and Probate Practice, Insolvency Practice and Family Law Practice.5 Some of the proposed electives in Semester 5 are Administrative Law Practice, Advocacy in Criminal Law, Industrial Law Practice, Intellectual Property Law Practice, Human Rights Litigation and Introduction to Islamic Banking and Finance.
“The Common Bar Course”[continued from page 17]
LEGAL AIDGALA CHARITY DINNER & DANCE
In conjunction with the 63rd Annual Dinner & Dance of the Malaysian Bar
Saturday, 14th March 2009, 8pmGrand Ballroom, Renaissance Hotel, KL
A 3-course Western-style Dinner garnished with Jazz, Cocktails, C7W, Rock Music and Comedy featuring Ocean of Fire, The Rozells and Legal AIDers ensemble
For inquiries and bookings please call:Ms Adilah Ariffi n at 03 2034 2071 / 03 2031 3003 ext 160
or email [email protected]
20 • article
Undertaking Comprehensive Judicial ReformBrendan Navin Siva analyses the way forward in reforming the civil justice system in Malaysia. This article was first published on Project Malaysia (www.projectmalaysia.org) under the issue of The Administration of Justice.
IntroductionAny efforts aimed at reforming the Judiciary and improving the administration of justice in Malaysia must firstunderstand that the problem in Malaysia is a multi-layered and multi-dimensional one. In this article, I wish to deal only with reform of the civil justice system in Malaysia.
Any attempt at judicial reform of the civil justice system must first comprehensively identify the problems faced in the administration of justice and their root causes, before even considering what measures ought to be taken toaddress them. I say this because amongst the variousstakeholders - the members of the Malaysian Bar, theJudiciary, the Attorney-General’s Chambers and theGovernment - there is no consensus as to what theproblems actually are and who or what is the cause of such problems. More importantly, it would appear thatmembers of the public do not have a real understanding of the complexity of the process. The public believe that the courts should be able to decide cases quickly. There is clearly an expectation gap between what the publicbelieve they are entitled to and what the system canactually deliver, even if operating at efficient levels.
The Malaysian Legal SystemThe Malaysian legal system is built on the foundations of the common law tradition and is an adversarial system. In a traditional adversarial system, the judicial proceeding involves the competing parties submitting their case and presenting their arguments in the manner that they see fit. The judge does not play an inquisitive or investigative role and, to a large extent, cannot enter the fray but mustdecide the case based on the evidence and submissions presented by both sides. Even though an individual believes that he or she has a strong case, the Court cannot make that determination without first going through thecareful and deliberate process of considering all theevidence and competing submissions on the law and the facts by the opposing parties. This, by its very nature, is a process that takes time. The amount of time required to make a determination would, of course, also depend largely on the complexity and number of issues that arise in each case. And cases today are clearly more complex than they were in the past.
The adversarial system also provides no real incentives for opposing parties to strive for a quick resolution of a case, if this is not in the best interests of both parties. This is most pronounced in civil and commercial cases. In most cases, one party would normally benefit from the case dragging
on in the courts. Steps will be taken to avail themselves of all available procedural and substantive avenues to avoid a quick resolution of the dispute. A Judge cannot cut through these efforts without hearing them on theirmerits. This again takes time. Further, depending on the nature of the facts and the applicable law in any particular case, it will always be in the interests of one party or the other to present their case as being complex andcomplicated whereas the other side would be adamantly arguing that the case is clear and one that can be decided quickly. But again the Courts must hear and consider all the arguments put forward by both sides. In other words,unless the issues are clear-cut, there is no quick fix. Even if we discount the huge backlog of cases and the ever increasing new filings every year, there will still be a fair amount of time required to hear and decide any particular case. The public should not therefore expect or demand swift results from the courts. But certainly the time taken should not be unduly lengthy.
Comprehensive Review of Administration of Justice NeededHow should judicial reforms be approached in Malaysia? There is only one way. It requires a comprehensive review of the entire system.
All the common law jurisdictions have in the last 10 to 15 years undertaken a wholesale review of their system ofadministration of justice and implemented concretemeasures to improve the efficiency, integrity andproductivity of their respective legal systems and courts.
Lord Woolf spent close to 2 years reviewing the civil justice system in the United Kingdom. His report in July 1996entitled ‘Access to Justice’ comprehensively outlined the problems afflicting the system and made 303recommendations to improve the system. New measures were implemented. They have been in place since 1999.
In February 2000, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong appointed a working party to review the civil rules and procedures of the High Court and torecommend changes thereto with a view to ensuring and improving access to justice at reasonable cost and speed. The working party completed their report in March 2004. It made a total of 150 recommendations for improvement.
In Canada, the Systems of Civil Justice Task Force was formed in 1995. The Task Force Report was released in August 1996. It contained 53 recommendations for reform.
21 • article
In Australia, the Australian Law Reform Commission review of the federal civil justice system commenced in November 1995. It released its report in August 1999. Most of the Australian states have conducted their own extensivereview of their respective state civil justice system. Thelatest is the work of the Victoria Law Reform Commission - the “Civil Justice Review Report” (see http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au). Released on 28 May 2008, theReport is the product of 18 months work and contains a comprehensive review of the Victorian civil justice system. It contains proposals designed to “reduce the time taken to resolve disputes, reduce costs and simplify the process of civil litigation”. The Report is 758 pages long.
It is time that Malaysia did the same. A commitment to the improvement of the administration of the civil justicesystem in this country would dictate that the Government of Malaysia must do so immediately. The MalaysianGovernment must undertake a comprehensive andwide-ranging review of the entire civil justice system. Bits and pieces of reform here and there will not be good enough. It will not remedy the many problems thatpresently befall the system.
And Malaysia is actually in a comparatively betterposition to undertake such a review, given the immense amount of material and data available from the reviews undertaken in all the other common law jurisdictions and the measures adopted by them to improve the ef fectiveness of theadministration of justice. The evidence of the level ofsuccess of such reforms is also available. We can easily identify and learn from what has been done in these other countries.
Wide and Extensive Consultation Must be ObtainedA common and important feature of all reform initiatives in the jurisdictions mentioned above is a commitment to wide and extensive consultation with all the various stakeholders so as to obtain the views of the broadest possiblespectrum of society. This includes the views of judicialofficers at every level of the court structure, the Bar, the academic community, the consumer bodies and so forth. The consultation process is crucial to developing a package of judicial reforms that are workable.
The Malaysian Government must therefore consult all the actual stakeholders involved. Sadly, an extensiveconsultation process has never been a common feature of the Malaysian Government. But it is time for change.
1 In a written reply to Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng in Parliament on 8 May 2008, de facto Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim stated that the backlog of cases in the High Court was 91,702 cases, with 125,944 in the Sessions Court and 777,703 in the Magistrate’s courts (The Sunday Star, 11 May 2008).2 ‘Injudicious Numbers’, New Straits Times, 1 September 2006.3 ‘Judges and Development’ by Raphael De Cornick, Global Law Working Paper 10/05, New York University School of Law.
If the Malaysian Government is really serious about its promise to effect wide ranging judicial reforms, it must firstcomprehensively ascertain and consider the views of all the parties involved and then work together with them to come up with a package of reforms that can practically lead to clear and tangible improvements in the civil justicesystem.
Increase the Number of JudgesOne of the fundamental areas that warrant seriousconsideration is the level of judicial resources in Malaysia. There are simply not enough judges and judicial officers to handle the backlog of cases yet to be disposed off1 and the increasing number of cases being filed every day. It was reported in the New Straits Times on 1 September 2006 that Malaysia has 2.4 judges per million people, compared with the United Kingdom’s 50.09 and the USA’s 107. India was reported as having 4 times the number of judges per capita2.
Although there are serious concerns about theproductivity of Judges in Malaysia and their ability to deliver reasoned decisions efficiently and timeously, even Judges who are disciplined and hard working and who want to
de l i ve r de t a i l ed andconsidered judgments would find it difficult to do sobecause of the heav yworkload. We cannot have a situation where Judges want to carefully consider matters
before them but are forced to cut corners because of the heavy scheduling and the pressure to dispose off pending cases.
The Malaysian Government must recognise that the failure to address this fundamental problem of shortage of judges could potentially render any other attempts or measures at judicial reform meaningless. The Government of Malaysia must allocate the funds necessary to increase the number of judges and judicial officers in this country. If it is required, there is also empirical evidence to suggest that there isactually a positive correlation between the number ofjudges per capita and economic growth, i.e. that anincrease in the number of judges actually has a positive impact upon economic growth3.
Improvement to Courtroom InfrastructureAnother area requiring reform relates to courtroominfrastructure. Members of the public, fed on a weekly dose of courtroom drama on TV, normally receivesomewhat of a shock when they appear for the first time in Malaysian courts and find Judges at all levels physically
“The Malaysian Government must undertake a comprehensive and
wide-ranging review of the entire civil justice system.”
22 • article
recording by hand the evidence of witnesses andsubmissions of counsel in every case. The process of taking evidence is painstaking and time consuming as judges and judicial officers themselves have to write down what the witnesses say during trials and what lawyers submit during hearings. Court recording and transcription services could instantly expedite the hearing of cases. It would also allow judges the time to evaluate the demeanor of witnesses and also to more carefully consider the legal arguments of the lawyers before them.
To its credit, the Judiciary did undertake a 3-month trialperiod this year whereby 3 different court recording and transcription services were tested in selected courtrooms in Kuala Lumpur. However, there has to date been no word as to the selection and implementation of any particular system of court recording and transcription services and most of the selected courts have now reverted back to the traditional mode of taking evidence.
Judicial Training and DevelopmentIt is also clear that significant resources need to bechanneled into judicial training and development, not just for fresh judicial officers, but also to ensure existing judges and judicial officers are kept abreast of developments in the law and in the real world. Just as lawyers requirecontinuing education and development, Judges also need to be in tune not only with the changing norms andattitudes of the public and also the many different legal and commercial concepts and issues that have developed and are being developed.
Judges are tasked to bridge the gap between legalprinciples and their application to modern day situations. Judges are required to adapt and apply the law to cater for and regulate modern day activities, thereby making the law relevant and efficient in handling current disputes. In certain circumstances, it may be that the law and legal principles must change to adapt to the present dayenvironment and it is the Judges who must make thisdetermination. Failure to understand modern, developing concepts and realities would mean that a Judge cannot competently apply the relevant legal principles to the facts at hand.
Remuneration of JudgesThe remuneration of judges and judicial officers must also be looked into. In his speech on 17 April 2008, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi,
promised a review of the Judiciary’s terms of service and remuneration. He acknowledged that there was a pressing need to set salaries and compensation to the right levels to ensure that the Bench can attract and retain the very best of the nation’s talent.
The point is simple. Judges and Judicial Officers do not get paid salaries that are competitive or comparable with that earned in private legal practice. A Magistrates’ basic salary would be RM1,989-00 a month. A High Court Judge takes home a basic monthly salary of RM13,054-97. A Judge of the Court of Appeal draws a basic salary ofRM13,581-50 while a Federal Court Judge’s basic salary would be RM14,108-024.
A first year lawyer in private practice could be on abasic monthly salary somewhere between RM2,200-00 to RM3,000-00. This figure normally increases annually and a 5th year lawyer could potentially earn somewhere between RM4,500-00 to RM7,500-00 a month (excluding bonuses and other fringe benefits). A lawyer in a large or medium sized law firm could become a partner as early as in his or her 5th or 6th year in practice. A junior partner could be earning anywhere between RM7,000 -00 toRM25,000-00 a month (excluding drawings and profit sharing, which could be a substantial amount). A senior partner could potentially earn significantly much more. And they usually do.
Given the glar ing dispar i t y in remunerat ion, theJudiciary would find it increasingly difficult to retain its present workforce, let alone attract and retain fresh legal talent of high quality. The promised review of theirremuneration packages has yet to materialise.
ConclusionI am certain many other lawyers and judges have other points similarly valid drawn from their own experiences and which they believe with conviction could assist inimproving the state of the Judiciary and the administration of justice in Malaysia.
I would hope this article has illustrated my point that the administration of justice in Malaysia is not a onedimensional problem that can be easily resolved. I hope that this article clearly makes the point that all thestakeholders and participants in the system must beconsulted so that a wide-ranging, bold, innovative and comprehensive package of judicial reforms - fair andequitable to all Malaysians - can be put together to ensure that we can proudly say that we managed to turn the tide and started, what the Regent of Perak His Royal Highness Raja Nazrin Shah so aptly called, a Judicial Renaissance5.
4 Judges’ Remuneration (Amendment of First and Fifth Schedules) Regulations 2008. Information obtained from an article entitled ‘Are We Paying Our Judges Enough ?’ by Roger Tan appearing in the New Sunday Times on 18 May 2008.5 Address by DYMM Raja Nazrin Shah at the Conference of Malaysian Judges on 9 April 2008.
Brendan Navin Siva
“Undertaking Comprehensive Judicial Reform”[continued from page 21]
“Given the glaring disparity inremuneration, the Judiciary would find itincreasingly difficult to retain its present
workforce...”
23 • legal updates
In the recent High Court decision of Alexander John Shek Kwok Bun v Rich Avenue Sdn Bhd & Anor [2008] 2 MLJ 481, the Plaintiff entered into a Sale and Purchase agreement with the Defendant in respect of a property in Seremban whereby it was stipulated in Clause 21.1 of the agreement that the definition of “vacant possession” did not include the connection of water and electricity supply to the property. The High Court held that the said clause did not make business sense, and that delivery of the property with all the usual amenities and a Certificate for Fitness of Occupation (CFO) after full payment of the purchase price was a fundamental term of the agreement.
The Court went on to state that it had a constitutional duty, on the basis of public policy, to ensure that the dominant person in a contract does not abuse his position against a weaker party notwithstanding the absence of a FairTrading Act as in the United Kingdom or a Trade PracticesAct as in Australia. The Court then rewrote the onerousterms of the contract and in so doing departed from theusual conservative approach to construction ofdocuments. However, this decision seems to be in line withthe 2007 amendments to the Housing and Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 which were introduced to protect the interests of house buyers’ and enhance theirrights. This decision is currently pending appeal and itsapplication may be confined, on its facts, to standardconsumer contracts only.
Justice Ramly Ali J was faced with a peculiar situation in the High Court decision of Putrajaya Holdings Sdn Bhd v Digital Green Sdn Bhd [2008] 1 LNS 92 where the intention of Parliament in relation to section 51(2) of the Arbitration Act 2005 was lost in translation. The Learned Judge had to consider whether to grant an order for a stay of the Court proceedings pending arbitration where the arbitration agreement had been entered into prior to the coming into force of the 2005 Act. The question arose as to whether the 1952 Act or the 2005 Act should apply when determining the stay application. Under the English version of section 51(2) of the 2005 Act, it seemed clear that the 1952 Act would apply only where arbitration proceedings had commenced before the coming into force of the 2005 Act. However, one of the grounds that led the High Court to apply the 1952 Act was the inconsistent BahasaMalaysia version of section 51(2) of the 2005 Act which excluded the applicablity of the 2005 Act from applying where the arbitration agreement is made or thearbitration proceedings were commenced before thecoming into operation of this Act. Justice Ramly Ali J found
that the Bahasa Malaysia version expressed the trueintention of Parliament. This factor was one of the grounds upon which the Learned Judge based his finding that the 1952 Act applied in this case.
This decision stands in contrast to an earlier High Courtdecision in Majlis Ugama Islam dan Adat Resam Melayu Pahang v Far East Holdings Bhd & Anor [2007] 10 CLJ 318 where an identical issue arose. Despite the fact that the agreement containing the arbitration clause was signed 1992, the Learned Judge applied the Englishversion of section 51(2) of the 2005 Act and held that the 2005 Act and its stay provisions applied as the arbitration proceedings were commenced after the coming into force of the 2005 Act.
The foundations of company winding up procedure and recovery practices were recently shaken by the recentFederal Court decision in Savant-Asia Sdn Bhd vSunway PMI-Pile Construction Sdn Bhd (26 September 2008, unreported) where it was held that once a petition for winding up is presented, the advertising of the petition is a mandatory requirement even if the debt of thepetitioning creditor has been settled by the respondent company. The Federal Court took the view that “the fact that no winding-up order was ultimately made is of noconsequence, as s. 219 of the Act is not concerned whether a winding-up order is eventually made or not, but seeks to provides protection to unsecured creditors upon the date of presentation of the petition.”
As winding up proceedings are a “class right” as opposed to a writ action, all unsecured creditors have an equal right to execute their claims against a company in debt. On this basis, the Court held that there is therefore the need for it to be advertised to give notice to other creditors of the petition.
The Court went on to state that the law will ensure that the assets or effects of the company will not be dissipated to enrich one or more unsecured creditors at the expense of the other unsecured creditors during the interim period between the date of the presentation of the petition for winding up to the date when the order for winding up is made.
Sukhjit Gill
LEGAL UPDATESLEGAL UPDATES is meant to alert members of recent developments in the law in otherjurisdictions. It is not meant to be legal advice. Members are advised to read the casesreported and form views or conclusions of their own.
24 • book review
BOOK REVIEW:CRIMINAL LITIGATION PROCESSJagjit Singh reviews Bajlit Singh Sidhu’s new book ‘Criminal Litigation Process’.
Criminal Litigation Process is an excellent book by Baljit Singh Sidhu who, despite his extremely busy criminalpractice, found time to contribute local legal literature on the aspect of Adjectival Law for Criminal LawPractitioners.
As a practice manual, the coverage is considerably wide and it is written with clarity to make it easilyunderstandable for young lawyers venturing into thepractice of criminal law.
There are al l in a l l 16 chapterscontaining approx imately 700pages. The book takes a criminallawyer through the his tor icalbackground and classification ofcriminal offences, and featureschapters such as the hierarchy of Courts, the law pertaining toarrest, search, police investigations, the powers of the Public Prosecutor, Charges, and appeals and revisions. An extremely commendable feature of the book is a chapter on Courts for children.
Criminal Litigation Process therefore is an excellent reference manual for criminal law practitioners who desire to learn the do’s and don’ts of the criminal litigation process.
Another good feature is that the book incorporates the recent amendments to Criminal Procedure Code through the Criminal Procedure Code Amendment Act 2006 and Criminal Procedure Code Amendment [Amendment] Act 2007, especially relating to the following areas:-
i) Rights to Arrested Persons, under Section 28 and Section 28A, and the changes to the remand provisions set out in Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
ii) Police Investigation powers, under Section 112 and Section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
iii) The lodging of the Police Report pursuant to Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
iv) Failure to report certain offences under Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
v) Procedure on the search of a person, set out in new Section 20A of the Criminal Procedure Code and insertion of a new schedule;
vi) Report on status of investigation, set out in the new Section 107A and Section 120 of the Criminal Procedure Code ;
vii) Pre-trial discovery, set out in the new Section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code;
viii) Meaning of prima facie in relation to Section 173 and Section 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
ix) The rights of the Accused after the end of the Prosecution’s case and before the defence is called, under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code;
x) Whipping for male Offender of the age of 50 and above, and the list of new exceptions in Section 289 (c) of the Criminal Procedure Code;
xi) Community Service under Section 293 of the Criminal Procedure Code; and
xii) Rehabilitation and Counselling, new Section 295A.
The discussion on these amendments are a boon forcriminal law practitioners wanting to know the scope,extent and effects of these amendments. In this regard, the author’s lucid and simple style is reader-friendly and must be appreciated.
Throughout the book, there are nuggets of practical advice and the author did not hesitate to enter into an academic discussion where necessary.
One of the great merits of the book is that it encompasses, within a reasonable span, virtually all questions that are likely to crop up in the practice of criminal law.
Baljit Singh Sidhu, an honest and dedicated lawyer, would not pretend to anyone that his book, Criminal Litigation Process, provides answers to all issues in criminal law,including the confl icting decisions of the Courts.
25 • book review
P.SIt is my simple privilege to add that for his dedicated and painstaking work Baljit Singh Sidhu was recently bestowed the Award of Dato by HisExcellency, the Government of Malacca.
CONGRATULATIONS.
However, there is great merit in the book, in that it has kept pace with the recent changes in criminal procedure as set out above.
I am confident Baljit Singh Sidhu will come out withsubsequent updates and publications to make the book aleading handbook for all criminal law practitioners.
The ease of reading and the manageable length of the text will no doubt make the book attractive to all legalpractitioners, judicial officers, officers in the legal services, law students as well as to others who seek a generaloverview of criminal law.
Like any other book, there is always room for
improvements. If the author had adopted a more critical approach, a greater insight into the operation of thecriminal justice system could have been gained.
Having thoroughly enjoyed reading Criminal Litigation Process, I have no hesitation to recommend this book as mandatory reading for anyone concerned with the law on the criminal litigation process.
Baljit Singh Sidhu’s book, Criminal Litigation Process, is in my view an excellent and painstaking effort which must be a welcome addition to the legal literature in the area of criminal law.
Jagjit Singh
BHARWANI ENTERPRISEVISHU R BHARWANI
Former Director of KAJ CHOTIRMALL & Co KL
No. 2, Jalan Kasipillay, Suite 2-16-8 Menara KLH,51200 Kuala Lumpur.
Tel : 03-74900167HP : 019-2159184Email : [email protected]
Specialises in Lawyers Robes, Syariah Robes,Wing Collar Shirts, Round Collar Shirts, Bibs,
Studs for Wing Collars, Wing Collars
26 • admission
Called to the Bar in Kuala Lumpur July - December 2008
We congratulate and welcome the following members to the Bar:
Mazhar Bin Abdul MalekNor Fadilah Binti Muhamad Amin
Vimala a/p SuppiahErma Wani Binti Ahmad Keflee
Lee Kuang ChaowNurul Ezwaney Binti Husin
Zil’Aida Binti ZulkifliGan Suk Peng
Jamilathul Rahimah Binti Namas KhanZuraida Binti Ali
Khairunnisa Binti IbrahimAadela Melati Binti Ahmad Termizi
Wan Muna Amirah Binti Wan Abu BakarNor Zuraini Binti Harun
Wan Mohd Farhan Bin Zainal AbidinMurni Suranti Binti Mohd Latip
Chan Yuit FongSoo Siew Mei
Siti Kharolina Binti BaharuddinLiew Cheow Har
Siti Radziah Binti KamarudinMohd Hezri Bin Shaharil
Khaizan Sharizad Binti Ab RazakHo Sing Hock
Norasliza Binti AdnanHoe Mei Lai
Bibi Waheeda Binti Arman KhanChen Tek LeeNg Ruixian
Nyomek Anak NyeapSiti Noryani Binti SamsuddinMohd Radziq Bin Jalaludin
Petrina Tan Tjin YiLee Tin Harn
Mohd Hadi Ar Rais Bin MuhamadNorhafiza Binti Ismail
Law Hieng LeeEdynoor Hiefnee Bin RazaliKhairun Nisa Binti Ahmad
Fadzilla Binti IsmailNuramarina Binti Zolkapli
Ganesan a/l NethiganantrajahNoor Jumaatun Binti Saaban
Siti Balkis Binti DalalilMohamed Fadzil Bin Abdul Manan
Devi a/p MunusamyAzura Hanim Binti Ahmad Suhaime
Mohd Izlan Bin ZolhaidiHafiza Binti Johari
Wan Anwar Bin Wan IbrahimTanya Marie Lopez
Joyce Lai Siaw SuengSiti Norliza Binti Mohamed Sanny
Mahfuzah Binti JamilFarida Binti MohammadIntan Farida Binti Adnan
Wan Teh Fatimah Binti Wan IsmailKarnan a/l RajanthiranMawaddah Binti Halim
Reen Rawaida Binti ZuhdiAsrinawati Binti Ahmad Radzi
Idris Bin SeydalaviMohd Aliffadhli Bin Zakaria
Prithviraj Singh SachdevVun Shu Tong @ Christopher
Loh Wen NiIrene Wong Sook Lin
Justin Leong Chee C’JunYow Kian Hooi
Dinesh A Sadhwani a/l AshokMar Wai Fong
Lee Weng ShinhSharulbariah Bt Aziz @ Nurshamila Bt Aziz
Kee Pei KimTay Hock AngBu Chun Pok
Tan Sheau JuanTan Ean EanTer Peh Lam
Shah Rizal Bin Abdul MananChong Tze Ying
Yusob Bin Md TasirRubachandran a/l Govindasamy
Lim Chi ChauYogeswaran a/l Bala Krishnan
Jesrina Kaur GrewalSharon Vincent
Lim Tze-MeiJananee Priya a/p Gopal
Lee Li HoongLee Kher Huan
Ahmad Saufi Bin Abdul RahmanHidayati Binti Shafie
Normaizan Binti RahimNorfazlina Binti Rani @ Ramli
Falacia Irene PasangMohd Syukree Bin Ngaiman
Adrian Wong Tung-FaSiti Masitah Binti Md Kassim
Ivy Kon Siaw WeiLee Poh Ling
Mohd Zubir Bin EmbongNoris Farida Siala Binti Permin
Raja Salahuddin Bin Raja SulongLisa Khoo Gaik Ling
Dharmesh Singh PenesarLim Wai TuckOon Wei Li
Cheng Mee ChingNgooi Wen Hui
Justin Wee Kim FangElianoor Munning
Mohd Fahme Bin HasnorIntan Syahida Binti Abu Samah
Chun Ming LiHew Sheau YingWong Siow Lee
Chan Xiao HueyJanice Sim Kar Chan
Tan Pak TheenTee Yee Wan
Tan Li JieFhansyurna Shalha Binti Othman
Nagaletchimy a/p V ManiamA Thanushia
Sharin Kaur a/p Kaher Atma SinghVictoria Loi Tien FenSara Keshini Anthony
Joseph Hoh Weng SengTeh Hooi Woon
Cynthia Junavence WilsonYeong Zihao
Sumarni Binti A RahmanIbrahim Bin Hashim
Mohd Syahril Bin DaudJeffrey Wong Poah Tcheng
Seow Siew TingFoo Siew June
Patricia Ng Ee LaineVeronica a/p SteevenChin Quant Lynn
Maisarah Binti JuhariUmi Fadhilah Binti Hamzah
Roger Bin StiminMahirah Binti A Manap
Abigail Lai Chai YeChan Cher YeenTan Tzai MunLam Jia Chuen
Avinash Vinayak PradhanLim Chu Ai
Samuel Loh Khian SeahRazif Bin Toha
Mohd Firdaus Bin Mohd ArifSutina Binti Labu
Lai Jin ShawnWong Wan ThengEmilia Van Buerle
Yap Vern Chieh GaryCaryn Wong Wai Sin
Kong Tze BingAlex Anton NettoJuvita Bin Jumpil
Lola Marissa Binti MaijonTang Kam FeiTan Chee KianFong Yii Mee
Emiliana Lau Siew YienYong Ker Ting
Emelyn a/p AlexanderGunalan a/l Paranjothi
Ahmad Hazrin Bin Abdul RahmanTiong Hou Tseng
Ng See KoonLionel Koe Whey Han
Denise Tan Kae JiSoo Yin JiaLee Shin Jie
Wong Zhu JoyceWong Jia YihHor Shirley
Muhammad Bukhori Bin Alias
Yong Siew FongFoo Juk-Lin
Siah Hui ShanWong Poh LimChong Tze Lin
Siti Fatimah Binti Mohd ShahromMohd Asri Bin Abdul Ghaffar
Ravneet Kaur GillVernon Jude SamuelChoo Yuen Cheng
Chia Leng SeenOng Kay Jin
Bernard Tee Shyong JiunnArchana a/p Patrick Selvaraj
Sia Chong HanSherliza Samantha Binti AsliSaritha Devi a/p KirupalaniKhairun Nadia Binti Sumali
Woon Huei ChinLim Bee Yi
Khoo Leet ChienThien Shy Wei
Devina Jas DulkuMohamad Hanafi Bin JantanNur Haliza Binti Mohd AliSujaihah Binti Abd Ghafar
Lew Chah YeeNor Aiza Binti Abu Hassan
Jade Yap Wei-LiToh Chern YenChee Shuk Tzu
Chan Chung Suen StephanieAzliza Binti Abdul Majid @ Abdul Nazil
Munirah Binti AminuddinAfendi Bin Dahlan
Lim Hern GeneSek Huai Theng Cindy
Nor Harliza Binti BaharomHong Ling Shan
Tan Siao HuiChuah Seong Eng
Kok Wen YingShirley Seet
Wong Mei YingSiew Ee Mei
Lee Tong ChaiNg Kwan SiangChong Ian Shin
Nurul Akmal Binti SuhailiAnita Kaur Gerewal
Moo Eng ThingTing Tze Fui
Irene Wong Ling ChiongSardjini Devi a/p R KaniappenNoor Fazlina Binti Abdul Rauf
Wong Tsin YueMohd Shamril Afzan Bin Mohamed Hasim
Kho Hui KhiangValerie Tang Yi-MunMalini Madiyazhagan
Lim Siaw WanGayathri Das a/p Saraschandran
Dazz @ Devadas a/l R K NarayananFarah Shuhadah Binti Razali
Lee MichelleJoanna Felicia Read
Wiwin Bt Abdul KaharNgim Chun Han @ Ngim Chin Han
Ng Chiat YangSiau Chui Bing
Deva Kunjari a/p Ramasamy MenonYou Choon Siong
Noraswani Binti Mohamed HashimNorshakinah Binti Ahmad Kamarudin
Raymond Charles a/l DavidNadia Aimi Binti Ab Wahab
Lee Kok PhongLeong Chun Lim
Jenny Low Sue LingRijalul Fauzi Bin MustapaNorsalihah Binti SulaimanNurulhuda Binti Mansor
Allister Brendan Tan Yu KuanRaja Nadia Sabrina
Nadia Marni Binti Mat ZinMuizz Bin Azli
Mansoor Bin SaatRazman Bin Abdul Rahim
Tio Shio PinLester Chin Foh Syn
Sae Juan Ling
Kamalanathan a/l VellaipoovanSheela Devi a/p Palanisamy
Mat Isa Bin Che DirMastura Binti Ruman
Lim Sin YeeSiti Zurairah Binti Mudzrin
Teoh Zhuo-WeiLiaw Yean Peng
Azlan Bin Zainal AbidinAlbert Raja XavierChong Foong Yee
Suzalena Binti SallehNgan Yuet ChingNgan Yuet Kim
Shobitha a/p RamadasanIylia Ihsan Bin Harith Gordon
Ahmad Fairuz Bin Zainol AbidinSiti Hajar Binti Mohd Zaki
Mohamed Firdaus Bin M FaroukAzaratulhasna Binti Arifin
Syed Zulfhadlie Bin Syed ZinChung Sim Yee
Wan Fazrina Binti Wan JaffarBoo Yang Huay
Tisya Binti Yunus Imran Bin HalipChin Siew MeeToi Tee ToenLee Tat Yew
Nur Hasnifarina Ahmad FauziNorasidi Bin Nadziruddin
Abdullah Khubayb AwaluddinNur Hanisah Binti MusaSufiah Binti Mansurdin
Steven Nyu Chin Eu @ Steven Yeo Chin EuMohd Zamil Ashraf Bin Abdul Manan
Natalia Binti KamarudinYap Ling-Ern
Nur Hidayah Binti Abd MutalibNuzul Iswani Binti Mawardy
Christina Sharmila Chelliah a/p JasonMusfirah Binti Mohamad Tahir
Mohd Jamizal Bin ZainolSharon Wong Say LianNurbaini Binti Alfian
Mohd Izan Helmi Bin Mohamed AslarAlexavier Lee Heng Seng
Cheng Ee LynnChen Siong Piau
Melody Khor Seek WinSharifah Dalilah Albar Binti Syed Zaid
Aza Fyreen Binti Abdul AzizGayathri Priya a/p Visayaragawan
Zaza Zarith Binti MukhtarAzmahanim Binti Azman Shah
Sophia Binti Amir HamzahNor Kamilah Binti Shahidan
Shehan Binti IsmailTeoh Choon Hui
Adriene Tan Hong KwunJohn Stanley Isaacs
Muhamad Mustaqim Bin MustaffaRaja Mohd Hafiz Bin Raja Nasharuddin
Darmain a/l Vijaya SegaranChoong Fui-Yu
Enna Nadra Binti YacobNor Emelia Binti Mohd Iszeham
Chen Boon HongLaw Chia Hui
Nor Rifhan Raimi Binti RoziYohan Thomas Zachariah Arrangatt
Allen Choong Kean HinAmira Binti Mohamed Razali
Shila MookerjiNor Afrah Binti Mohd Alib
Lim See ChewJanet Phan Pui Li
Nur Rohaila Binti AliasMohamad Fauzi Bin Abdul Samad
Rosdiliyana Binti RoslanMohd Azlan Shah Bin Mohd Mokhtar
Mohd Isa Bin Md NorNur Aqilah Binti Mohd Isa
Sachpal Singh a/l Sigwind SinghNor Azilah Binti Mat
Nur Zakiyah Binti ShamsudinLam Wai KwanLian Chen HueiLing Chi Hoong
Azrina Binti Abd Rahman
27 • activities
Activities of KL BarKL Bar Annual Dinner & Dance 29.11.2008
PDC Seminar on Industrial Law - Collective Agreement on 24.07.2008
PDC Seminar on Asset Backed Security on 19.08.2008
Pupils Seminar on 30.07.2008 Bankruptcy Proceedings andIntroduction to S.218 Winding Up Petition.
Pupils Seminar on 30.07.2008 Bankruptcy Proceedings andIntroduction to S.218 Winding Up Petition.
Pupils Seminar 23.9.2008 PDC Seminar on Human Rights Law & Advocacy on 23.09.2008
Pupils Seminar on Wills, Probate & The Administration of Estates on 19.11.2008
Seminar on Tribunal for House Buyer Claims- Jurisdiction Procedure and Award Enforcement on 25.11.2008
Seminar on Joint venture- What you need to know as a Practitioner on 24.10.2008
Seminar on Medical Law Consent & Confidentiality on 10.09.2008
Seminar on Issues Pertaining toDivorce in Syariah courts inMalaysia on 11092008
Seminar on Which Arbitration Institute & Place of Arbitration on 31.10.2008
ITC Forum on Identity Theft on 20.11.2008
PDC Seminar
ITC Forum
