Introduction:

To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription

Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe

YEOH POH SAN & ANOR v. MAJLIS PEGUAM [2015] 9 CLJ 1029
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
MOHD HISHAMUDIN YUNUS JCA, ALIZATUL KHAIR OSMAN JCA, LIM YEE LAN JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02-3073-2009]
28 SEPTEMBER 2015

LEGAL PROFESSION: Practise of law - Unauthorised person - Complaint by Bar Council to Disciplinary Board - Clients' account - Allowing person not an advocate and solicitor to sign cheques - Whether contravened s. 82(2) of Legal Profession Act 1976 - Whether explanation had merits - Whether appointment of Disciplinary Committee compulsory - Whether Disciplinary Board entitled to dismiss Bar Council's complaint

LEGAL PROFESSION: Practise of law - Misconduct - Complaint by Bar Council to Disciplinary Board - Disciplinary Board dismissed Bar Council's complaint - Appeal to High Court - Whether High Court Judge erred in compelling Disciplinary Board to proceed with disciplinary action - Whether High Court Judge usurped statutory powers of Disciplinary Board

PP lwn. KRISHNAMOORTHI MARUTHAN [2015] 2 SMC 97
MAHKAMAH MAJISTRET (TRAFIK), KUALA LUMPUR
AMAL RAZIM ALIAS MJ
[SAMAN NO: 83-250-03-13]
20 DISEMBER 2013

LALULINTAS JALAN: Memandu secara berbahaya - Memandu secara berbahaya menyebabkan kematian si mati - Kenderaan lain terbabit akibat pemanduan tertuduh yang tidak berhati-hati - Sama ada kenderaan tertuduh terbabas dan hilang kawalan - Sama ada tertuduh memandu dengan kelajuan yang sepatutnya - Sama ada tertuduh pemandu yang munasabah dan mengambil langkah berhati-hati semasa memandu - Keterangan pegawai perubatan - Sama ada si mati mengalami kecederaan dalaman - Sama ada wujudnya kandungan alkohol dalam darah tertuduh - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh bermerit - Sama ada tertuduh dijatuhkan hukuman penjara dan denda - Sama ada tertuduh hilang kelayakan untuk memandu kenderaan bagi tempoh tiga tahun

LALULINTAS JALAN: Memandu secara berbahaya - Pengendorsan kesalahan pada lesen memandu - Pemanduan tertuduh menyebabkan kematian si mati - Sama ada dibuktikan - Laporan perubatan si mati - Sama ada kenderaan tertuduh terbabas dan hilang kawalan - Sama ada tertuduh memandu dengan kelajuan yang sepatutnya - Sama ada tertuduh pemandu yang munasabah dan mengambil langkah berhati-hati semasa memandu - Sama ada si mati mengalami kecederaan dalaman - Sama ada wujudnya kandungan alkohol dalam darah tertuduh - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh bermerit - Sama ada tertuduh dijatuhkan hukuman penjara dan denda - Sama ada tertuduh hilang kelayakan untuk memandu kenderaan bagi tempoh tiga tahun

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Hukuman - Memandu secara berbahaya menyebabkan kematian si mati - Sama ada tertuduh terbabas dan hilang kawalan - Sama ada tertuduh memandu dengan kelajuan yang sepatutnya - Sama ada tertuduh pemandu yang munasabah dan mengambil langkah berhati-hati semasa memandu - Sama ada tertuduh dijatuhkan hukuman penjara dan denda - Sama ada tertuduh hilang kelayakan untuk memandu kenderaan bagi tempoh tiga tahun - Sama ada kesalahan tertuduh diendorskan pada lesen

Legal Network Series

CLJ 2015 Volume 9 (Part 8)

COURT

FEDERAL COURT

Lai Weng Keat v. PP
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder - Trial de novo) [2015] 9 CLJ 957 [FC]

COURT OF APPEAL

Meenachi Holding and Trading (M) Sdn Bhd v. Serba Kemas Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Land Law; Civil Procedure - Alienation of incidents - Re-alienation of surrendered land) [2015] 9 CLJ 979 [CA]

Tanjung Teras Sdn Bhd v. Kerajaan Malaysia
(Contract - Payment for works done - Agreement - Sale of land and construction of apartments) [2015] 9 CLJ 1002 [CA]

Yeoh Poh San & Anor v. Majlis Peguam
(Legal Profession - Practise of law - Unauthorised person - Complaint by Bar Council to Disciplinary Board) [2015] 9 CLJ 1029 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Mohd Soffian Mohd Yusof & Satu Lagi lwn. PP
(Prosedur Jenayah - Perbicaraan - Perbicaraan bersama - Pra-syarat prinsip satu transaksi) [2015] 9 CLJ 1046 [HC]

PJZ Marine Services Sdn Bhd v. Tamsir Samsun
(Company Law - Directors - Fiduciary duties - Breach of) [2015] 9 CLJ 1070 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Parties - Non-joinder of party - Non-joinder of previous registered proprietor - Whether non-joinder of party justified - Whether non-joinder of party in plaintiff's suit fatal to plaintiff's case
Meenachi Holding and Trading (M) Sdn Bhd v. Serba Kemas Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Abu Samah Nordin, Alizatul Khair Osman, Aziah Ali JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 979 [CA]

COMPANY LAW

Directors - Fiduciary duties - Breach of - Relationship of confidence and trust - Conduct, action and deeds of director - Duty to avoid conflicts of interest - Whether director had fiduciary duty to protect company's interest - Whether defendant had personal knowledge of information prejudicial to company - Failure to carry out duty as director in good faith for benefit of company - Whether director had preserved interests of competing company - Whether company proved case against director on balance of probabilities - Exemplary damages - Whether reasonable
PJZ Marine Services Sdn Bhd v. Tamsir Samsun
(Hasnah Mohammed Hashim J) [2015] 9 CLJ 1070 [HC]

CONTRACT

Payment for works done - Agreement - Sale of land and construction of apartments (project) - Principle contractor and sub-contractor - Failure to complete project within time frame - Termination of agreement with principle contractor - Whether sub-contractor could counterclaim for compensation for works done - Quantum meruit - Whether conditions under s. 71 to be compensated for works done satisfied - Whether trial judge erred in interpreting conditions - Principle in Siow Yong Fatt v. Susur Rotan Mining - Whether applicable - Contracts Act 1950, s. 71
Tanjung Teras Sdn Bhd v. Kerajaan Malaysia
(Abdul Wahab Patail, Linton Albert, Lim Yee Lan JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 1002 [CA]

CRIMINAL LAW

Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Change of judge during hearing - Whether case should have been heard de novo - Prosecution case resting entirely on circumstantial evidence - No contradictions in evidence of prosecution witnesses - Credibility of prosecution witnesses not an issue - Whether accused prejudiced by dismissal of application for case to be heard de novo - Whether convictions safe
Lai Weng Keat v. PP
(Arifin Zakaria CJ, Raus Sharif PCA, Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin CJ (Malaya), Ahmad Maarop FCJ, Hasan Lah FCJ) [2015] 9 CLJ 957 [FC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Trial - Trial de novo - Change of judge during hearing - Murder charge - Whether succeeding judge has discretion to either hear case de novo or to continue from point where it had been left by previous judge - Circumstances where case should be heard de novo - Whether application for case to be heard de novo properly dismissed - Whether accused prejudiced - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 261 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 18(2) & (3)
Lai Weng Keat v. PP
(Arifin Zakaria CJ, Raus Sharif PCA, Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin CJ (Malaya), Ahmad Maarop FCJ, Hasan Lah FCJ) [2015] 9 CLJ 957 [FC]

LAND LAW

Alienation of incidents - Re-alienation of surrendered land - Surrender and re-alienation exercise pursuant to s. 204A to 204H of National Land Code - Power of State Authority - Whether State Authority vested with discretion to decide on ownership of land while exercising power to re-alienate surrendered land pursuant to s. 204A to 204H of National Land Code
Meenachi Holding and Trading (M) Sdn Bhd v. Serba Kemas Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Abu Samah Nordin, Alizatul Khair Osman, Aziah Ali JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 979 [CA]

Indefeasibility of title and interests - Insufficient instrument - Land re-alienated under different surrendered proprietor - Land subsequently sold to an immediate transferee - Whether there was breach of s. 204B of National Land Code in issuance of document of title - Land obtained by means of an insufficient or void instrument - Whether could confer good title to an immediate transferee - Whether interest in land defeasible by virtue of s. 340(2)(b) of National Land Code - Whether proviso to s. 340(3) of National Land Code applicable for an immediate transferee
Meenachi Holding and Trading (M) Sdn Bhd v. Serba Kemas Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Abu Samah Nordin, Alizatul Khair Osman, Aziah Ali JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 979 [CA]

Title - Subdivision - Re-alienation of surrendered land pursuant to s. 204A to 204H of National Land Code - Proper procedure - Land surrendered for purpose of subdivision of new title - Whether new sub-divided title shall be prepared in name of person or body last registered as proprietor - National Land Code, s. 186
Meenachi Holding and Trading (M) Sdn Bhd v. Serba Kemas Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Abu Samah Nordin, Alizatul Khair Osman, Aziah Ali JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 979 [CA]

LEGAL PROFESSION

Practise of law - Misconduct - Complaint by Bar Council to Disciplinary Board - Disciplinary Board dismissed Bar Council's complaint - Appeal to High Court - Whether High Court Judge erred in compelling Disciplinary Board to proceed with disciplinary action - Whether High Court Judge usurped statutory powers of Disciplinary Board
Yeoh Poh San & Anor v. Majlis Peguam
(Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, Alizatul Khair Osman, Lim Yee Lan JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 1029 [CA]

Practise of law - Unauthorised person - Complaint by Bar Council to Disciplinary Board - Clients' account - Allowing person not an advocate and solicitor to sign cheques - Whether contravened s. 82(2) of Legal Profession Act 1976 - Whether explanation had merits - Whether appointment of Disciplinary Committee compulsory - Whether Disciplinary Board entitled to dismiss Bar Council's complaint
Yeoh Poh San & Anor v. Majlis Peguam
(Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, Alizatul Khair Osman, Lim Yee Lan JJCA) [2015] 9 CLJ 1029 [CA]

INDEKS PERKARA

PROSEDUR JENAYAH

Perbicaraan - Perbicaraan bersama - Pra-syarat prinsip satu transaksi - Sama ada dipenuhi - Sama ada perintah memindahkan kes diterima sebagai perintah perbicaraan bersama - Sama ada Majistret boleh mengarahkan Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen menjalankan perbicaraan dua kes secara bersama - Sama ada perbicaraan bersama sah - Sama ada pelanggaran peruntukan nyata undang-undang prosedur boleh ditampung - Kanun Tatacara Jenayah, ss. 170 & 422
Mohd Soffian Mohd Yusof & Satu Lagi lwn. PP
(Kamardin Hashim H) [2015] 9 CLJ 1046 [HC]

Rayuan - Dapatan fakta - Sama ada hakim bicara telah membuat pertimbangan maksima kesemua fakta - Sama ada wujud percanggahan material dalam keterangan saksi-saksi - Sama ada wujud keraguan munasabah dalam kes pendakwaan - Sama ada salah arahan oleh hakim bicara memprejudiskan dan menimbulkan ketidakadilan kepada perayu-perayu
Mohd Soffian Mohd Yusof & Satu Lagi lwn. PP
(Kamardin Hashim H) [2015] 9 CLJ 1046 [HC]

Pernyataan-pernyataan - Kebolehterimaan - Pernyataan bertulis perayu pada asalnya dirakamkan sebagai kenyataan saksi - Sama ada pernyataan bertulis boleh diterima apabila perayu dipertuduh di mahkamah - Sama ada penerimaan masuk pernyataan bertulis mencabuli hak berdiam diri perayu semasa siasatan polis - Kanun Tatacara Jenayah, ss. 112 & 113
Mohd Soffian Mohd Yusof & Satu Lagi lwn. PP
(Kamardin Hashim H) [2015] 9 CLJ 1046 [HC]

LNS Article(s)

1. KNIGHT AT THE CROSSROADS － CONTINUING TO ACT AFTER THE ACCUSED ABSCONDS* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   ALVIN CHEN** [2015] 1 LNS(A) c

[2015] 1 LNS(A) c



SINGAPORE

---

KNIGHT AT THE CROSSROADS － CONTINUING TO ACT AFTER THE ACCUSED ABSCONDS*

ALVIN CHEN**

Introduction

A famous 1878 painting Knight at the Crossroads by the Russian artist, Viktor Mikhailovich Vasnetsov, depicts a knight on a white horse looking at a “rune stone (and the skeletal remains)” and deciding “the hard path which fate has decreed”.^[1] Vasnetsov’s painting was intended to portray a leitmotif in Russian folk tales, one of which recounts a tsar’s son, Ivan, on a quest to find a firebird and coming upon “a rock inscribed with the following message: ‘He who goes straight ahead will starve and freeze. He who goes to the right will lose his horse. He who goes to the left will die’”.^[2]

Like the knight at the crossroads, the defence counsel faces a conundrum when the accused absconds. Rule 77 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules (“PCR”) states:

If during the course of a criminal trial and prior to final sentence, the accused absconds, the advocate and solicitor may continue to act and, if he does so, the advocate and solicitor shall conduct the case on the basis of the instructions he has received as if the client is still present in Court but had decided not to give evidence.

. . .

* This article was originally published in the (March/2012) issue of the Singapore Law Gazette (www.lawgazette.com.sg), the official publication of the Law Society of Singapore, published by LexisNexis. Reproduced with permission.

** Chief Legal Officer, Director, Representation and Law Reform, The Law Society of Singapore. E-mail: alvin@lawsoc.org.sg

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. THE ENGLISH EXPERIENCE OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE REFORM* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   LORD DYSON MASTER OF THE ROLLS [2015] 1 LNS(A) ci

[2015] 1 LNS(A) ci



UNITED KINGDOM

---

THE ENGLISH EXPERIENCE OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE REFORM*

LORD DYSON
MASTER OF THE ROLLS

(1)    Introduction^[1]

1.     It is a real pleasure to have been invited to Jersey to deliver the keynote address today. I think that I am the first Master of the Rolls to visit Jersey in an official capacity.

2.     My subject today is the English experience of access to justice reform. There has been a considerable amount of activity in this area during the last 20 years or so. You will all be familiar with the Woolf Reforms of the late 1990s. In 2007, Sir Richard Aikens produced his Long-Trials Review, in which he looked at how to deal with so-called ‘supercases’ – extremely complex high value claims.^[2] We then had the Jackson Reforms. And most recently, the Chancery Division of our High Court has been subject to reforms arising from the Briggs Review.^[3] Today I want to focus on the Jackson reforms.

3.     The Jackson Reforms originated from the concerns by Sir Anthony Clarke MR about the high cost of civil litigation. He believed that the Woolf Reforms had not succeeded in delivering proportionality in litigation costs. He, therefore, commissioned Sir Rupert Jackson, then recently appointed to the Court of Appeal, to carry out a fundamental review of the costs of civil litigation. Sir Rupert was asked to do the job within twelve months and that is precisely what he did and to great effect. By December 2009 he had gathered evidence, consulted widely, toured the country listening to interested parties, and travelled abroad in order to learn from the experience of other jurisdictions. In May 2009, he produced a detailed Preliminary Report,^[4] and In December he produced his impressive Final Report.^[5]

. . .

* Lord Dyson, Master Of The Rolls (Jersey, 15 May 2015). Published with kind permission of the Judicial Communications Office, Judiciary of England and Wales (https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/ 2015/05/mr-jersey-lecture-may-2015.pdf).

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

CLJ Article(s)

1. "ISLAMIC BANKING REGULATORY AUTHORITIES IN MALAYSIA: THEIR ROLE AND POWERS"A CRITICAL VIEW ^{[Read excerpt]}
   JUSTICE DATUK DR HJ HAMID SULTAN ABU BACKER JUDGE, COURT OF APPEAL MALAYSIA* [2015] 9 CLJ(A) i

[2015] 9 CLJ(A) i



MALAYSIA

---

"ISLAMIC BANKING REGULATORY AUTHORITIES IN MALAYSIA: THEIR ROLE AND POWERS"
A CRITICAL VIEW

JUSTICE DATUK DR HJ HAMID SULTAN ABU BACKER JUDGE COURT OF APPEAL MALAYSIA*

Assalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

My greetings to everyone. I thank you for your presence here today.

It is a pleasure and honour for me to be here by invitation to share my thoughts with you on the theme "Islamic Banking Regulatory Authorities in Malaysia: Their Role and Powers".

I say a pleasure for two reasons. One; the subject on Islamic banking is one very close to my heart. I have spent much of my time in its learning and have written a number of articles and books to promote Islamic banking within the parameters of the 'Shariah'. I have also asserted that the State must have proper regulatory framework to ensure products are Shariah compliant, besides ensuring that the interests of customers as well as the banks are justly protected.

Any regulatory framework relating to Islamic banking without proper protection to the banks as well as customers will create inequities and in the long run may fail and such failure may destabilise the nation's economy. Further, inequities or unjust acts or conducts are 'shunned' in Shariah jurisprudence and the protection for the public or consumer is mandatory as opposed to traders.

Shariah jurisprudence has a sacrosanct foundation. In consequence, the regulatory framework of the State must meet the legitimate expectation of the public who are subscribing to the product as 'Shariah compliant' and in that process ensure that the consumers get good value for their money. It should also make certain that there is a balance in the bargaining power between the bank and the consumers in order for the business of Islamic banking to thrive and bring great economic success to the nation within the Shariah parameters.

With the new regulatory framework in place, which the previous speakers have admirably set out, one must not be complacent that the regulatory authorities have been sufficiently empowered with the roles and powers to regulate, and in default to penalise all forms of default, in relation to Islamic commercial transactions. This may not be so.

. . .

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert