July–Sept 2011 www.malaysianbar.org.my
Chronicle of the Malaysian Bar
The Sporting Edge
PLUS A First Class Legal Profession
Akta Orang Kurang Upaya 2008, Harapan dan Realiti
Report by Bar Council Monitoring Team on 9 July 2011 Public Rally
In collaboration with
For Malaysian Bar circulation only TEANA_Praxis_blank.ai 1 9/06/11 10:46 Rob Contents
PRAXIS Contents CHRONICLE OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR President’s Message Readers’ Comments Editorial Features/Articles BAR COUNCIL MALAYSIA 7 A First Class Legal Profession BAR COUNCIL 12 Co-extensive Liability vs Indefi nite Liability 15 Leboh Pasar Besar 50050 Kuala Lumpur 16 Akta Orang Kurang Upaya 2008, Harapan dan Realiti Tel No: 603-2050 2050 Fax No: 603-2026 1313 / 603-2034 2825 / 603-2072 5818 20 The 6th Annual International Bar Association Email Add: [email protected] Website: http://www.malaysianbar.org.my Bar Leaders’ Conference — A Commentary 22 Unwinding a Winding Up? MEMBERS OF BAR COUNCIL MALAYSIA 2011/2012 24 Long Call Speech President: Lim Chee Wee Vice-President: Christopher Leong 26 Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan Secretary: Tony Woon Yeow Thong Treasurer: Steven Thiru Events
Aaron Abraham | Ahmad Taufiq b Baharum | Amirruddin b Abu Bakar | Anand Ponnudurai Andrew Khoo Chin Hock | Aziz b Haniff | Brendan Navin Siva | Desmond Ho Chee Cheong 29 Disruption Day Workshop Dipendra Harshad Rai | George Varughese | Gnasegaran s/o Egamparam | S Gunasegaran Hendon Mohamed | Hon Kai Ping | K Mohan K Kumaran | Kanarasan Ghandinesen 30 Visit to Singapore Coroner’s Court and Maxwell Chambers, Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari | Low Beng Choo | Mad Diah b Endut | Mukhtar b Abdullah and Informal Meeting with Law Society of Singapore Murelidaran Navaratnam | Ng Kong Peng | Ragunath Kesavan | Rajpal Singh s/o Mukhtiar Singh Rao Suryana bt Abdul Rahman | Richard Wee Thiam Seng | Sarengapani s/o K Rajoo 32 Dinner-and-Dialogue with Members of Parliament Shamsuriah bt Sulaiman | Sulaiman b Abdullah | Syamsuriatina Ishak th Yasmeen bt Hj Mohd Shariff | Zainuritha-Alfa bt Datuk Abu Hassan 34 4 Young Lawyers Convention 39 Report by the Bar Council Monitoring Team on the Public Rally Held on 9 July 2011 in Kuala Lumpur EDITORIAL BOARD 44 Meeting with American Council of Young Political Leaders Bar Council LexisNexis Syamsuriatina Ishak – Editor Ivan Yap Min Kee – Contract Publishing Manager 45 Upcoming Events Azman Thaiyub Khan – Assistant Editor Razlina Razali – Associate Editor Chua Ai Lin – Senior Officer/Assistant Editor Ryan Yee - Design & Production Anis Taufik – Assistant Officer Hasnizam Mohamad – Marketing & Advertising Dewani Zolkifli – Marketing & Advertising Lifestyle Noor Arianti Osman, Fahri Azzat, Aston Paiva, David Mathew & Janet Chai – Editing Team 47 Karen Cheah: What is it about Cupcakes? 50 The Spiritualised Lawyer 52 Aria@Damansara: A Lawyers’ (Non-Foodie) Review 56 Advertorial — Run Your Practice the Smart Way Sports LEXISNEXIS MALAYSIA SDN BHD T1-6, Jaya 33, 3, Jalan Semangat Seksyen 13, 46100 Petaling Jaya Selangor Darul Ehsan Malaysia State Bar News Tel: (603) 7882 3500, Fax: (603) 7882 3506 Book Review Praxis is the official publication of Bar Council Malaysia, published quarterly in collaboration with LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn Bhd, for circulation to Members of the Malaysian Bar. 75 ASEAN Competition Law Bar Council Malaysia, and its authorised authors and designers of Praxis, accept no liability for any loss arising from the use of, or reliance on, Praxis. Bar Council Malaysia does not warrant the accuracy By the Way ... of the contents thereof or any statement made by the contributors, writers or advertisers herein, and does not accept responsibility or liability in relation thereto. Statements of contributors, writers or advertisers herein represent their personal views and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bar 76 Crossword Puzzle Council or the Malaysian Bar. All users are permitted to view the content of Praxis, without prejudice to the intellectual property rights belonging to Bar Council Malaysia. However, any unauthorised 77 Cartoon & Sudoku reproduction, duplication, transmission or alteration, in any form or by any means, whether in part or in whole, of Praxis, is strictly prohibited. Bar Council Malaysia also prohibits the use of Praxis and all or any of its contents herein, for commercial and/or personal gain, profit or sale. Bar Updates/Notices © 2011 All rights reserved. 79 New Admissions to the Malaysian Bar Enquiries on advertising: Hasnizam Mohamad — [email protected] 82 Summary of Circulars Nishta Jiwa — [email protected] 84 Library Updates — Legislative Updates, New Books Article contribution: 90 Notice Regarding Documents in Bar Council’s Custody Bar Council Malaysia welcomes letters, articles, views and news (including photographs) for possible 91 Disciplinary Orders inclusion in Praxis. However, Bar Council Malaysia reserves the right not to publish or to edit those published for content, clarity, style and space considerations. Contributions and enquiries may be directed to [email protected].
Circulation: 14,000
CoverC Photo Credit: LawLa Society of Singapore
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 1 President’s Message
Dear Members, circumstances that led to the death of Teoh Beng Hock. The Bar’s outstanding group of committed, fearless and hardworking he Bar’s exemplary spirit of unhesitating sacrifice, members in the RCI-TBH team — Sivaneindiren s/o Selvanandam, commitment to excellence and truth, fair play and Nahendran Navaratnam, Cheow Wee, Robert Low and Edmund generosity has been reflected in three different arenas in T Bon — were ably-led by our Vice-President Christopher Leong, recent months: the annual Malaysia/Singapore Bench and Bar and assisted by Richard Wee and a large group of young lawyers, Games, the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Death of Teoh pupils in chambers, law graduates and students. They sacrificed Beng Hock (“RCI-TBH”), and the public rally held on 9 July. four months of their lives, declining paying briefs during this period of time in order that Malaysians can get closer to the truth The Malaysian delegation to the Bench and Bar Games returned regarding this tragic episode. We now await the publication of home from Singapore triumphant with the Judge’s Cup, which the RCI-TBH’s report, and can only hope that the Commissioners we proudly continue to hold for the sixth consecutive year. will arrive at the right findings. Our relationship with our brothers and sisters in law across the Causeway is a special relationship, not just because of historical Most recently, I was overwhelmed at the response when we reasons, but also owing to kindred ties. The Bar thanks and salutes invited Members of the Bar and pupils in chambers to come the Malaysian players who displayed the Olympian spirit where forward and join the monitoring team to observe the public rally “the most important thing ... is to not to win but to take part ... held on 9 July. Special gratitude goes to the Bar Council Human not to have conquered but to have fought well”. I must single out Rights Committee for spearheading this effort. I was similarly our squash team for special mention because the players exhibited encouraged at the large number of volunteers who signed up fair play at its finest, when they invited the Singaporean team to to be a part of the urgent arrest team, organised by the Bar replace their injured player instead of insisting on a walkover win. Council Legal Aid Centre (Kuala Lumpur). The Malaysian Bar pays Overall, Malaysia won by 7.5 points to Singapore’s 6.5 points. tribute to all those who selflessly worked hard, sacrificed their time, roughed it out on the night before the rally, braved tear A special word of thanks goes to our Chief Justice, YAA Tun Dato’ gas and water cannons, and provided legal assistance at places Seri Zaki b Tun Azmi, who attended as many games as he could where arrested persons were held. They played a crucial role to encourage and cheer our players on, not least when the venues that supported the rakyat’s exercise of their rights to freedom of for the various games were scattered throughout Singapore, and assembly and expression. the journey to each location sometimes lasted longer than the actual visit. Our appreciation goes also to our Singaporean friends Moving from how the Bar gallantly stepped forward, Bar Council (especially Wong Meng Meng, President of the Law Society of had to respond to two court-related issues, namely the circular Singapore) for their hospitality, and to the Sports Committees of announcing the fingerprint requirement on documents attested both the Malaysian Bar (with Jaspal Singh as the Chairperson of by Commissioners for Oaths, and e-filing. We were not consulted the Organising Committee for the Games) and the Law Society of by the Judiciary prior to the circular being issued to Commissioners Singapore (chaired by Joseph Liow) for their collective effort and for Oaths, and the first we heard of it was when court documents dedication in making the Games a smashing success. were rejected at filing counters in Malacca. We immediately approached the Chief Justice, who explained that the intention During the Games, Bar Council members together with our behind the circular was to prevent fraudulent declarations Chief Justice visited the Maxwell Chambers, which house the involving matters such as vehicle transfers and identity cards. Singapore International Arbitration Centre and other arbitral After hearing our views on the problems and perceptions arising institutions, and also visited the Coroner’s Court (where we were from such a circular, the Chief Justice promptly restricted the accompanied by the Chief Judge of Malaya YAA Tan Sri Arifin b application of the circular to Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan Malaysia Zakaria, and Federal Court Judge YA Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Md Raus b (“JPJ”) matters. We thank the Chief Justice and the Chief Judge of Sharif) for briefings regarding Singapore’s arbitration regime and Malaya for the speed with which they responded to our concerns its new Coroners Act. Some of our Secretariat staff visited their (especially since our Chief Justice was then recuperating), and counterparts at the Law Society of Singapore to exchange views we requested the Chief Justice to consult the Bar before circulars and information on issues relating to membership, compliance affecting our practice are issued. and practice areas. In this regard, we acknowledge the generosity of our Singaporean friends in sharing their ideas, knowledge and As a matter of policy, e-filing would be a boon to legal practice experience. and the legal system, if implemented properly and without being made compulsory. Some obvious benefits are the potential The second occasion where the Members of the Bar stepped convenience, speed, efficiency and savings in costs (in the long forward was in the search for the truth regarding the run), as well as resources such as paper. Regrettably, however,
2 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 President’s Message
numerous problems with the e-filing system been formed, and each Working Group is have been identified, unlike the other now developing its terms of reference before components of the e-court project — case meeting with the Judiciary and the Attorney management and the queue management General’s Chambers. Some of the issues they system, for example — that appear to be will tackle include e-filing, the nine-month working well. deadline for disposal of new commercial and civil cases, insufficiency of resources to We are collating the complaints over e-filing, transcribe the notes in the court recording and request that Members address their and transcribing system, and the fixing of grievances directly to the service provider by hearing dates and rushed hearings in the email at [email protected], and extend Court of Appeal. a copy to Brendan Siva, the Chairperson of the Bar Council Court Liaison Committee, by Our court rules are being amended to facilitate email at [email protected]. Brendan has e-filing, service of witness statements and the been working tirelessly to assist Members in reduction of the post-judgment interest rate. resolving the various problems encountered The Proposed Combined Rules of Court is in with e-filing, by highlighting these to the the midst of being finalised. The draft will be service provider and the courts, and by disseminating information circulated to Members at the appropriate time, and roadshows to Members. Members should appreciate that the root of the will be held to explain the amendments. e-filing problems lies with the lack of consultation where the government did not seek the views of the Judiciary and the Bar Bar Council is studying the proposed amendments to the Criminal in developing the entire workflow process of e-filing, and in the Procedure Code and the Evidence Act and drafting a position approach of launching a major initiative to the big states without paper for submission to the Attorney General’s Chambers. We first testing it in a more limited area. In neighbouring Singapore, will also organise roadshows to explain the application of the e-filing was introduced gradually over an extended period, and recently-tabled Limited Liability Partnership Bill, once it is passed only worked fully after a number of years and after the resolution into law. of myriad problems. We should have learnt from the Singaporean experience. The various Bar Council committees are now planning their policies and projects for the term, and Members will no doubt Nonetheless, we now have to deal with the digital certification see an increase in activities during the rest of the year. In this requirement, long queues and delays in processing filings, hold- context, Bar Council welcomes the contributions of Members ups in extraction, and so on. A meeting was held on 12 May 2011 who are willing to serve the Bar. Further, the young lawyers had between e-filing users, CIMB Bank, the service provider and the their Convention in early July and the Bar looks forward for the Judiciary to discuss the problems with e-filing, and steps are being next generation of leaders to step forward. The struggle for an taken by the service provider and the Judiciary to address these independent, courageous, intellectually-superior and widely- hiccups. Bar Council intends to hold another forum on e-filing. respected Bar and Bench must continue and I am confident that the Bar will be in good hands with this generation of young The State Bars of Selangor, Penang and Johore requested that the lawyers. Judiciary delay implementation of e-filing in those states until the problems in KL are resolved. Alas, the contract with the service Finally, Bar Council urges Members to give generously of their provider apparently requires that the implementation take place time and energy, and to exemplify the Bar at its best, not in these states. forgetting that we are all “debtors to the profession”.
Bar Council will continue to work with the Judiciary to resolve the glitches relating to e-filing. We acknowledge the Judiciary’s hard Lim Chee Wee work in wanting to make the system successful, but if the serious President problems persist, we may have no choice but to request that the Malaysian Bar Judiciary suspend the system until these problems are resolved. We are cautiously optimistic that it will not come to this. 14 July 2011
Pursuant to the joint press release issued by the Chief Justice and me on 7 Apr 2011, the Working Groups for the courts have
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 3 Readers’ Comments
The cover of the Apr-Jun issue of Praxis took me back to my childhood days, when Mummy would put me on her lap (to keep me out of mischief) whilst preparing for a case. When I grew older and could not fit Mummy’s lap anymore, I then startedPraxis magazine,reading Mummy’s it would law find books it’s way and into most my annoyingly lap. to her, the slimmest of all reading materials being her Praxis this year, my mum is happy because now she does not have to share her copy with With the revival of . me anymore. Gone are the daysPraxis when Mummy had to explain to me ultra vires, injunction, and the wit and innuendo laced throughout
Thank you Editorial Board for bringing back the fixture of my childhood and doing so in such a fantastic manner, not just with the magazine’s layout but giving us as before relevant and thought provoking articles and the poetic sarcasm of Mr Cecil’s contribution. Praxis! Congratulations and long live
K S Shasha Messrs Tunku Munawwir, Chin & Solomon Petaling Jaya, Selangor I am saddened to learn of the passing of Ungku on the afternoon of 12th July 2011. He represents an era and the Bar is indebted to the late Ungku for his foresight and leadership. He remains the only President of the Bar to date for having selflessly served intermittently over a period of 3 decades, in the 1970s, 80s and 90s. His persuasiveness was his strength. He was kind and gentle yet compelling and honest with his views. Always a teacher and a friend to his peers. He respected his fellow colleagues and in turn, he was always well-respected by the Bar and Bench. There was a case when a member of the Bar could have been cited for Yet another brilliant issue of contempt. However, the late Ungku for the gentleman that he was, was reluctant to institute Praxis. Great job. Cheers. contempt proceedings against a fellow practitioner. Instead, he was a believer in continuing education and had always shared his thoughts, knowledge and rich experiences, including Andrew Suresh the Tun Salleh Abas saga. The late Ungku was appointed a Judicial Commissioner on circuit Messrs Gurdial Bakan Singh in the early 1980s for a brief period. Kuala Lumpur I shall treasure the memory of his great intellectual capacity and remain inspired by his enthusiasm for his vocation and for justice to be done and his active engagement in upholding and advancing the cause of human rights.
May you rest in peace and God bless your soul. My deepest sympathies and condolences to his wife, Catherine, and children. Dear Ungku, you shall always be remembered. Thank you for the opportunity to have crossed paths in life.
Ramsun Ho Messrs See Ramsun & Tan Penang
Dear Readers,
We are pleased to invite any comments regarding our content. All comments may be sent via email to [email protected] by 15 Aug 2011. The best few will be printed in our “Readers’ Comments” section, wherein our favourite amongst them will also receive a free copy of the book reviewed in the “Book Review” section of each Praxis issue commented upon. For this issue, the book up for grabs is “ASEAN Competition Law”. For this purpose, please provide your details — name, law firm name and address, telephone number and email address. While we shall only identify printed comments by name, firm name and state, comments that omit providing full details will be disqualified from reproduction. Happy writing!
4 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Editorial
From the Editor’s Keyboard ...
Within the coming quarter which this issue I was truly inspired watching players put Iskandar b Abang of Praxis will cover, I will again welcome my aside their work stress to embrace the spirit Hashim, reminding favourite annual events as a Malaysian … of competition and comradeship. If only us all what it we had more opportunities to cast aside means to be an Lessons in humility and gratitude, and our differences: we’d realise we have much ethical lawyer. achieving a plain and honest existence are more in common than we think. emphasised and internalised during in the This issue also sees a revival of the Praxis holy month of Ramadhan. This culminates Overall, I was proud to witness our section Human Writes featuring “Akta with the gleefulness of Aidilfitri, a festival contingent demonstrating a big heart and Orang Kurang Upaya 2008, Harapan dan that bears all the trappings of childhood passionate sportsmanship. The players Realiti: Satu Pendekatan Praktikal” by a delights alongside as its visually-impaired Member sombre connotations. By of the Bar, Mohammad chance (or divine design, If only Hitler and Mussolini could have a good Faizal Che Yusof, from I’d like to believe) this year’s game of bowls once a week at Geneva, I feel whom we can all take fasting month and Hari Raya inspiration. also coincides with the that Europe would not be as troubled as it is. celebration of Hari Malaysia ~RG Briscow In the Lifestyle section, and Merdeka Day. we are proud to showcase more Members’ pastimes, In light of recent heated discussions on what sacrificed their time and money, many even where our team had a double gastronomical it means for us to be Malaysians, I think returning with injuries and bruises on our delight when we descended into the warm these annual celebrations, superficial affairs behalf, due to the intense fight that the kitchens of Malaccan lawyer, Karen Cheah, as some would claim, should nonetheless Games was! All efforts paid off when we for her scrumptious cupcakes and the Italian be taken as an opportunity for all of us to triumphed by bringing back the Judge’s fine dining restaurant “Aria”, located in take stock of what we have and what we Cup to the Malaysian soil. Congratulations Damansara Heights, owned by some KL could achieve by making a positive resolve to all who made it a success! It made me lawyers. to harmoniously live alongside one another proud to be a Malaysian indeed. in this nation we call home. This issue also sees the addition of a To share this feeling bubbling inside me new section — New Admissions, listing For me, the circumstances of my individual from the Games and in anticipation of the recent admissions to the Bar — and the upbringing, religious or racial background, festive season ahead, the Praxis Editorial introduction of a witty cartoon in the including which way I throw my ballot, can Team brings its readers the third quarter By the Way section by none other than never adversely affect the love I feel for this issue of 2011 (July–Sept), featuring the Editorial Team member, Ryan Yee of nation. Suffice to say that I am proud to be theme “The Sporting Edge”. This adage LexisNexis. Not forgetting, of course, a Malaysian and will continue to live my life is, after all, one that all of us can take to our coverage of Events at national- and permeating this sentiment … heart in our own practice and personal lives State Bar-level (one recent and particularly as Malaysians. important event — the 4th Young Lawyers This spirit of togetherness also reminded Convention 2011 held in Malacca during me of a trip I took during the long Labour As expected, our issue this time features the 1st July weekend), and other Bar Day weekend, accompanying others within a bumper segment on the Games in our Updates/Notices. our profession … Sports section, penned by the previous Chairperson of the Bar Council Sports I take this opportunity on behalf of the As with the previous games, the Malaysia/ Committee, Jaspal Singh Gill. Editorial Team to wish all Muslim Members Singapore Bench and Bar Games (“Games”) Selamat Berpuasa and Salam Aidilfitri, is an event organised with the specific Other notable content in this Praxis are the and to all readers, a safe and meaningful purpose of strengthening the ties between various legal articles and commentaries, National Day celebrations! Bar members and other stakeholders of including among others, a comeback to last the legal fraternity, from both sides of issues’ article on the need to raise the Bar via Syamsuriatina Ishak the Causeway. This year’s Games took us a Common Bar Course (“CBC”) in the article Editor of Praxis and Chairperson of Bar across shores to the land of neighbouring entitled “A First Class Legal Profession”, Council Publications Committee 2011/12 Singapore, bringing together over 500 from none other than the Treasurer of the lawyers from various types of practices — Malaysian Bar, Steven Thiru, and a long small, medium and large firms, from all over call address by the learned YA Tuan Abang Malaysia and Singapore.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 5 www.bac.edu.my Institute of Legal Executives (ILEX)
&
ILEX DIPLOMA FOR LEGAL SECRETARIES AND PARALEGALS
The ILEX Diploma for Legal Secretaries and Paralegals are specialized AUGMENT YOUR CREDENTIALS AND STAY AHEAD OF THE GAME
The Diplomas are designed for secretaries, assistants or for any law Areas of study include:
The ILEX Diploma for Legal Secretaries and Paralegals ensures that t Legal Word Processing and Audio Transcription departments through the familiarity with legal terminology, basic t Business Skills in the Legal Environment t Legal Information Processing and management skills, litigation and paralegal essentials. t Administrative Aspects of the Litigation Process The ILEX Diplomas are unique because they bypass the common t The Legal Environment route associated with traditional 2-year colleges, technical training centers or even private career schools; the Diplomas are concentrated t Principles of Liability and precise in content and relevance to the legal industry and to the t And many more ..... career aspirations of secretaries, assistants, practicing lawyers and even fresh law graduates.
50470 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel +60322744165 Fax +60322744174 email: [email protected] CALL 1-800-888-LAW(529) TODAY! Features/Articles
A First Class Legal Profession A Common Bar Course to Transform the Training of New Entrants to the Malaysian Legal Profession by Steven Thiru1
Raising the Bar — A riposte school leavers in the United Kingdom generally lack “basic employability In the last edition of Praxis (Apr–June skills”. She recounted the experience of 2011), senior lawyer Roger Tan lamented a managing director of a medium-sized that the quality of lawyering in Malaysia Information Technology company, who has palpably declined over the past two interviewed 52 fresh graduates for middle decades. He also pointed out that the management positions, and said: various stakeholders have not done enough to deal with this “unsatisfactory On paper they looked “brilliant state of affairs” that plagues the legal students”. Each had three As at A level profession today. and 2:1 degree. He shook his head. “There’s a big difference between Bar Council is undoubtedly a people passing exams and being ready critical stakeholder, enjoined by for work.” the Legal Profession Act 1976 to uphold the standards of the This was obvious even before the Malaysian legal profession. interview began. Of the 52 applicants, The purpose of this article half arrived late. Only three of the 52 is to shed some light on walked up to the managing director, the efforts undertaken by looked him in the eye, shook his hand Bar Council to establish and said, “Good morning”. The rest a uniform system of “just amble in”. When he asked them training for new entrants to to solve a problem, only 12 had come the legal profession, known equipped with a notebook and pencil. as the Common Bar Course (“CBC”). In its sweep, The three who had greeted him proved the CBC is intended to the strongest candidates and he hired address many of the them. Within a year they were out concerns expressed because of their “lackadaisical” attitude. over the quality They did not turn up on time; for the and standards of first six months a manager had to check our lawyers. all their emails for spelling and grammar; they did not know how to learn. It was It is noteworthy the first time they had ever been asked that the to learn on their own. Their ability to deterioration of “engage in business” was “incredibly” quality/standards disappointing and “at 5.30 on the dot is not peculiar to they left the office.”2 the legal profession. Indeed, it appears that What has Bar Council done? this is today a general malaise that is pervasive the Bar Council has wrestled with this vexed world over. In a prescient article question of quality and standards for a published in The Times of London number of years. It is accepted that there recently (“Schools are churning is no single panacea to the problem. out the unemployable”), Harriet However, the CBC has always been Sergeant noted that young regarded as a step in the right direction. In
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 7 Features/Articles
2008, Bar Council established a dedicated in nature and the programme “… must Thus, the Bar Council’s CBC proposal is committee, the Bar Council Ad Hoc therefore take on itself the duty of:- not a wholesale reproduction of any one of Committee on the Common Bar Course, to these other jurisdictions. The Committee look into the syllabus, structure and course 1) teaching certain practical skills in a has nevertheless adopted the critical parts content of the CBC. The members of the practical way. of these programmes in the CBC proposal. Committee consisted of senior members of the Bar, academics and the then-Head 2) teaching or providing the The Committee also carefully considered of the Malaysia Qualification Agency.3 The opportunities for acquiring the the emphasis of the programmes in these Committee completed its task in 2009 and knowledge necessary for or assumed other jurisdictions, ie academic teaching vs its proposal was subsequently adopted by by these skills, if the legal and factual practical/vocational training. It is notable Bar Council. situations used in the skills acquisition that in all these jurisdictions there has been are not restricted to problems raised a demonstrable shift in focus to practical A brief history of the Bar Council’s CBC by the academic stage subjects. training based on experiential learning. proposal 3) teaching any additional legal subjects The Committee further took into account Bar Council has advocated for the CBC which are seen as essential for daily the apparent weaknesses in the Certificate since the mid-1980s. In this regard, practice in the office or in the courts of Legal Practice (“CLP”) and the poor the Committee had the advantage of and which have not been taught in quality/standards of law graduates coming considering the following working papers the academic stage.”5 into the Bar from both local and foreign that were considered by Bar Council universities/law colleges. As regards the between 1989 and 2003: The former Minister of Law in the Prime CLP, the Committee took the view that Minister’s Department, Datuk Zaid it is outdated and does not serve the (1) The Morrison Report (1989); Ibrahim, was quoted as saying that there requirements of the modern day legal (2) Seeking Quality: Bar Council’s was a need for a common evaluation profession. On the quality/standards Memorandum on Legal Education system “to avoid disparity among those question, the Committee noted some of Reform and Qualifications for Entry entering the profession”. “... We want to the shortcomings seen in the Bar Council into the Legal Profession (1993); standardize the point of entry and elevate Ethics and Professional Standards course (3) Report on the aims/objectives of the the standard of the legal profession in the for pupils, eg abysmal language skills, law programmes in public institutes of country.”6 He echoed the statement made appalling ethical values and the abject higher learning (1999); by the then-President of the Malaysian absence of rudimentary legal skills. A (4) Paper on the Common Bar Exams Bar, Ambiga Sreenevasan: failure rate of 60% (at the inception of presented by Khutubul Zaman the course) was alarming and urgent Bukhari at the 12th Malaysian Law The aim of the course is to have a measures were obviously needed to arrest Conference, 10 Dec 2002; common examination for all law this shocking state of affairs.8 A concerted (5) Report on the review of the CLP graduates entering the legal profession, attempt has been made to deal with these (2002); and irrespective of where they had pursued concerns. (6) Bar Council Memorandum on Legal their undergraduate degrees.7 Education Reform (2003). The governing principles of the CBC The approach Bar Council has consistently taken the Thus, the first principle of the CBC is stand that the CBC “… should be the As a starting point, the Committee that it will serve as a single entry point ultimate filter for entry into the profession considered postgraduate professional into the legal profession in Malaysia to ensure quality. This means the check on training programmes (for advocates and regardless of where the undergraduate quality will not be at the undergraduate solicitors/barristers and solicitors) in other qualification is obtained (locally or from level i.e. entry into law schools but at the Commonwealth jurisdictions, namely the foreign universities/colleges of law). There professional entry level i.e. professional United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, may of course be a list of recognised qualifications for entry into the Bar. Thus Hong Kong, Singapore and Canada. universities/colleges of law (local and the final check would be at the entry level Whilst the experiences of these other international) that would be determined into the legal profession”.4 jurisdictions were useful as guidelines, the by the Legal Qualifying Board. Committee did not lose sight of the fact Bar Council has also in the past emphasised that the profession in Malaysia is fused. Next, the basic objectives of the proposed that the CBC should be “vocational” CBC are as follows:
8 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
(1) The focus of the programme should be The proposed CBC structure Semester 2: Legal Aptitude, Ethics and on skills/practical training (as opposed Practical Skills to testing on legal knowledge) to It is proposed that the CBC be conducted (1) Legal Language and Communication equip the student-at-law for legal in five semesters over a period of 20 Skills (including IT skills) practice in Malaysia; months (inclusive of pupillage). In this (2) Lawyering Skills and Practical Legal regard, the first three semesters will entail (2) The vocational nature of the training Research full-time study whilst the remaining two will be complimented with academic semesters will be conducted part-time (3) Legal Ethics and Professionalism (substantive law) elements, only together with pupillage. (4) Business and Solicitors Accounts where necessary. Thus, the CBC will not deal with substantive law, which (5) Interviewing and Client Counselling Semesters 1, 2 and 3 will consist of should remain the domain of the Skills compulsory subjects. In semesters 4 and universities/law colleges; (6) Opinion Writing 5 (where the students-at-law would be (3) The CBC must combine the modern undergoing pupillage), there would be (7) Student Law Office Programme experience of other Commonwealth a mixture of compulsory subjects and jurisdictions and our peculiar electives. As noted earlier, by their choice Semester 3: Core Subjects 1 requirements (in a fused profession, of the electives, the student-at-law (now (1) Civil Procedure with the inherent weaknesses); pupil) can start tailoring their training (2) Criminal Procedure to suit their preferred area of practice (4) The CBC should prepare the student- (litigation or non-litigation). (3) Drafting Skills at-law for the first two years of (4) Evidence practice; Further, the first three semesters (5) Real Property Practice (5) The CBC should also enable the essentially deal with aptitude, ethical (6) Commercial and Corporate Practice student-at-law to choose (if they so values, basic legal skills and core areas of (7) Student Law Office Programme desire) to become either an advocate practice. These constitute the bedrock of (litigation) or a solicitor (litigation or legal practice in Malaysia and are intended Semester 4: Core Subjects 2/Electives 1 non-litigation). This is achieved by to ensure that those coming into the Bar giving the student-at-law the option have the requisite qualities. In this regard, Compulsory Subjects it is envisaged that there should be a to fashion their training in the last two (1) Introduction to Advocacy semesters to cater for their choice; stringent assessment system that would and sieve out those who do not possess these (2) Negotiation Skills fundamental requirements. A “guillotine” (3) Alternative Dispute Resolution — (6) The CBC must deal with some of would be imposed after each of the first Mediation the shortcomings in pupillage and three semesters to achieve these purposes. enhance the training during pupillage. In other words, it is not a given that all Electives (Choose 4) students-at-law would make the grade (4) Advanced Evidence A revolutionary feature of the proposed and complete the CBC. CBC is that it is intended to run parallel (5) Advanced Civil Procedure with pupillage. Under the proposed Another critical aspect of the CBC is the (6) Advanced Criminal Procedure scheme, the student-at-law will undertake Student Law Office programme (which (7) Advanced Real Property Practice the CBC on a full-time basis in the first is in semesters 2 and 3). This entails the three semesters. They will then begin their (8) Advanced Corporate and Commercial students-at-law in the CBC being divided Practice pupillage and continue with semesters into small legal firms. They will, for all (9) Wills and Probate Practice four and five of the CBC on a part-time intents and purposes, function as a legal basis. firm in Malaysia and they are to put into (10) Insolvency Practice practice the legal skills that have learnt (11) Family Law Practice The incorporation of pupillage into the (or are learning) in a simulated legal CBC will hopefully deal with some of the environment. Semester 5: Core Subjects 3/Electives 2 shortcomings in the training of pupils. First, it will allow pupils to easily compare A snapshot of the subjects in the respective Compulsory Subjects the level of training that they are receiving semesters is as follows: (1) Remedies from their masters with their peers. (2) Execution/Enforcement Proceedings Secondly, if there are weaknesses, the dual Semester 1: Introduction to Malaysian effect of “peer-learning” and participation Legal Practice Electives (Choose 5) in the CBC programme would provide a safety net. The programme, in particular, (1) Practical Aspects of Malaysian Law (3) Administrative Law Practice could be used to deal with these (2) Legal Interpretation Skills: Constitution, (4) Advocacy in Criminal Law weaknesses. Statutes and Case Law (5) Industrial Law Practice (3) Practice Management Skills (6) Intellectual Property Law Practice
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 9 Features/Articles
(7) Human Rights Litigation Universiti Malaya and the International provides an excellent opportunity for Bar (8) Alternative Dispute Resolution — Islamic University Malaysia. The proposal Council to revise and update the current Arbitration has also been submitted to the Legal proposal (where necessary) and bring it on Qualifying Board and it is being considered par with the training in other jurisdictions. (9) Introduction to Islamic Banking and by a dedicated committee set up by the Members of the Bar who share Bar Finance Board. Further, Bar Council established a Council’s concerns over the deterioration Joint Consultative Committee consisting of quality and standards are encouraged The proposed subjects are not carved in of the Ad Hoc Committee on the CBC to attend this conference. Your views and stone. New electives should be included and representatives of public universities, experiences will certainly contribute to a to meet the demands of the stakeholders. private law colleges, the Attorney holistic discourse on the future of legal General’s Chambers and the Legal training for aspiring lawyers. For further Experiential learning Qualifying Board. The proposal has been details and registration, please contact presented and discussed at the meetings Sumitra Penesar by email at sumitra@ The Committee also considered the mode of this Committee. There have been some malaysianbar.org.my. of delivery and the assessment system. It very good suggestions and these will no would appear that most jurisdictions have doubt be taken on board. A transformed Bar? moved away from the traditional lecture- seminar/tutorial as the mode(s) of delivery Conference on Legal Education — Bar Council has taken concerted steps to of the CBC. Chris Roper, the former Qualifying for the Bar: Standards put the CBC on the national radar. The Director of the College of Law, Sydney, Across the Jurisdictions backdrop has been the general decline notes as follows: in the quality of the legal profession. It is There have been a number of obvious that the bar on standards must be We should break out of the early middle developments in other jurisdictions in raised. Thus, the CBC cannot be delayed ages and realize that the printing press the training of new entrants to the or ignored any longer. The future of the has actually been invented, and hence Bar. For example, the highly regarded legal profession depends on a viable CBC not everything that needs to be learnt Bar Vocational Course of the United that deals with the current problems and has to be taken in through the ears! Kingdom has been now replaced by a new meets societal expectations. The CBC has In other words, an increased reliance programme called the Bar Professional the potential to transform the Bar with a on students learning by reading or Training Course. It is clearly important new generation of well-trained and skilled watching (e.g. demonstrations on DVD that the changes (and experiences) of lawyers. It bodes well for the future and or the computer of, for example, seeking these other jurisdictions be considered for a first-class legal profession in Malaysia. an adjournment) and a decreased in crafting and finalising our nascent reliance on lecturing. This has cost CBC. To this end, Bar Council, together 1 The author is the Chairperson of the saving implications although upfront with Taylors University, are organising Bar Council Ad Hoc Committee on the costs in preparing material for students the abovementioned conference on 29 Common Bar Course and this article is to read or view. In fact I would ban the and 30 July 2011 at Taylors University based on the proposals made by the words “lectures” and lecturers” from the Lakeside Campus. Foreign experts on Committee and adopted by Bar Council. CBC and really make the point that it is postgraduate Bar programmes have 2 Reported in the New Sunday Times, 14 about enabling learning, not about the agreed to deliver papers at this conference Mar 2010. traditional way they have learnt so far. on recent developments in their respective 3 Steven Thiru, Hendon Mohamed, Adjunct jurisdictions. They include Professor Nigel Prof R Rajeswaran (UiTM), Dr Rozlini Thus, the modern approach (as part of Savage (Chief Executive, College of Law Mary Fernandez Chung (MQA), Prasad experiential learning) is to have a mixture of England and Wales), David Quark Abraham (now Judicial Commissioner, of lecture-seminar/tutorials, online (Executive Director, Singapore Institute Of High Court Malaya), Sheila De Costa, GK learning, DVDs, practical and industrial Legal Education), Chris Roper (Secretary, Ganesan, Ken St James, Mariette Peters, training. This should result in cost savings Judicial Conference of Australia), Professor Murad Ali, Roger Tan, Dato’ Muhammad and it would also impact on the logistical (Dr) Madhava Menon (Dr Radhakrishnan Shafee Abdullah, Nahendran Navaratnam, requirements for the CBC. Chair on Parliamentary Studies (Rajya SS Muker. Sabha), India), Dieter Yih (Vice-President, 4 Bar Council’s Memorandum on Legal The consultation process Law Society of Hong Kong) and Professor Education Reform dated 3 Jan 2003. Bradford Morse (Dean of Law, University 5 Khutubul Zaman Bukhari, 12th Malaysian The Committee has conducted a number of Waikato, New Zealand and Professor of Law Conference (10 Dec 2002). of public briefings on the CBC proposal. Law, University of Ottawa, Canada). The 6 The New Straits Times, 15 May 2008. These included briefing the Council of conference promises to be an interesting 7 The New Straits Times, 6 Apr 2008. Deans of the law faculties of the public meeting of minds of leading individuals in 8 The pass rate has since improved and universities, the faculties of law of this area. In this regard, the conference stands at about 70% now.
10 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011
Features/Articles
Co-extensive Liability vs Indefi nite Liability
by Puthan Perumal
Introduction In Malaysia, the principle of co-extensive liability of a surety with that of the principal debtor is embodied in section 81 of As in the recession of the 1990s, creditors today are often forced the Contracts Act 1950. The principle essentially recognises to look to sureties (also more commonly referred to as guarantors) the position that the liability of a surety is dependent on the for payment of debts of insolvent debtors. One of the main existence of the liability on the part of the principal debtor as arguments that could be relied on by lawyers acting for sureties is a pre-requisite. Therefore, as an example, if the principal fulfils that the surety had been released from his or her guarantee as the his or her obligations, then there is, or should be, no question of claim against the principal debtor has been released/discharge/ liability arising on the part of the guarantor. extinguished for whatever reasons. On the face of it, this principle of co-extensiveness seems to be applicable in cases of guarantees (a contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case of his default). Except in the case of demand guarantee, which appear to have been treated in a different manner so as not to attract the operation of the co-extensive principle as enshrined in section 81 of the Contracts Act 1950.
In Malaysia, the position in respect of a demand guarantee is that the cause of action against a person who stood as a surety in such a guarantee situation only accrues when the surety is called upon by way of a notice of demand to make payment.
What this implies is that a creditor is then able to take all the time in the world to make a demand upon the surety; thus making the liability of the surety indefinite as he or she will never be sure when he or she will be called to make repayment, and the existence, or rather the non-existence, of the principal debtor’s liability plays no part whatsoever, hence: indefinite liability.
The danger with this concept of indefinite liability is that it seems to convert the nature of a guarantee, albeit a demand guarantee, into one of an indemnity, thus depriving the surety of the defence of limitation under the Limitation Act 1953.
This article sets out cases in other jurisdictions that applied this principle of co-extensive liability, particularly the jurisdictions of India, Canada and Australia, in comparison with the position in Malaysia, as well as the recognition of this principle in the United Kingdom.
It is hoped that the position in Malaysia as regards “indefinite liability” would in time be cleared up by our apex court, so as not
12 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
to leave guarantors in Malaysia hanging in mid-air without any • Malaysian High Court case of Government of Malaysia v certainty as to their liability. Gurcharan Singh & Ors [1971] 1 MLJ 211
Hypothetical background When a demand is made by Bank X on Surety Z as guarantor, in a demand guarantee situation, as a condition precedent before Bank X made advances by way of an overdraft facility to the liability of Surety Z arises, such demand should be for payment Borrower Y some time in 1 July 1993 in the sum of RM100,000. of a sum which is legally due and recoverable from Borrower Y. A contract of guarantee dated 1 July 1993 was signed by Surety If the debt had already become time barred against Borrower Y, Z undertaking to pay on demand by Bank X if Borrower Y the question of Bank X demanding payment thereafter, for the defaulted in repayment demand guarantee. first time, against Surety Z, as guarantor would not arise as the claim is not a “live” claim. The only activity or transaction in the account was the drawdown, which took place on 1 July 1993, and thereafter the account • Indian Supreme Court case of Syndicate Bank v became dormant. Channaveerappa Beleri & Ors [2006] 11 SCC
Bank X failed to take any action to recover against Borrower A guarantee is generally a contract between a guarantor and a Y and on 1 July 1999 whatever debt by Borrower Y to Bank X lender. The subject of the guarantee is a debt owed to the lender. became time barred pursuant to section 6(1) of the Malaysian In the contract of guarantee, the guarantor agrees to repay the Limitation Act 1953. lender if the debtor defaults. The exact nature of the obligation owed by the guarantor to the lender depends on the construction It is settled law that a bank cannot recover a dormant overdraft of the contract of guarantee, but the liability of the guarantor after the period of limitation from the last advance has expired. is usually made coterminous with that of the principal debtor. Generally speaking, if the principal debt is void or unenforceable, • Malaysian Federal Court case of Sim Siok Eng v Kong Ming the contract of guarantee will likewise be void or unenforceable. Bank Berhad [1980] 2 MLJ 21 Contracts of guarantee are sometimes distinguished from contracts of indemnity. In a contract of indemnity, the indemnifier Bank X made a demand on Surety Z for the first time on 1 Dec assumes a primary obligation to repay the debt, and is liable 2001, some two years and five months after the principal debt regardless of the liability of the principal debtor. The distinction was time barred vis-a-vis Borrower Y. between contracts of guarantee and of indemnity ought not to be overemphasised. Applying the principle of co-extensiveness, Bank X subsequently commenced a civil action on 1 Feb 2002 to the limitation period on the guarantee lapses when the limitation recover the sum of RM100,000 advanced back in 1 July 1993. period on the principal obligations lapses.
The issue • Canadian Supreme Court case of Communities Economic Development Fund v Canadian Pickles Corp [1991] 3 SCR In the above demand guarantee situation, whether a demand 388 (SCC) against the surety could be made for the first time (on 1 Dec 2001) resulting in the liability of the surety to pay, when the debt It results from the definition of a surety’s engagement as being had become time barred against the principle debtor/borrower? accessory to a principal obligation — the extinction of the principal obligation necessarily induces that of the surety. It being The law the nature of an accessory obligation, it cannot exist without its principal. Therefore, whenever the principal is discharged, in Section 81 of the Contracts Act 1950 states that the liability of a whatever manner it may be, the surety is likewise discharged; surety is co-extensive with that of the principle debtor, unless it is for the essence of the obligation being that the surety is only otherwise provided by the contract. obliged on behalf of a principal debtor, he therefore is no longer obliged when there is no longer any principal debtor for whom What this means is that the liability of a surety is no less or no he is obliged. more than that of the principal debtor. When Bank X seeks to enforce the debt against Surety Z, the surety is entitled to ask: • Australian High Court case of McDonald & Anor v Dennys Is Borrower Y liable in the first place? If not, Surety Z has Lascelles Ltd [1933] 48 CLR 457 committed no default and Surety Z’s obligation to pay does not arise. There are, however, authorities that have departed from this approach and the pronouncements therein imply or suggest that
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 13 Features/Articles
in cases involving demand guarantee, the liability of the surety is In the English Court of Appeal case of Stadium Finance Co v indefinite. Helm [1965] 109 SJ 471, Lord Denning MR laid down the test to be applied in making the distinction between an indemnity and a In the English Court of Appeal case of Bradford Old Bank guarantee and applied the principle of co-extensiveness in making Limited v Sutcliffe [1918] 2 KB 833, it was held that there was that distinction: no cause of action against the guarantor until a demand has been issued and the plea of the Statute of Limitations failed in that The test was whether, as between two people, one of the case. two was under a primary liability to perform the obligation, while the other’s obligation was secondary only. If so, it was a In the Malaysian Federal Court case of Wee Kee Puan v OCBC contract of guarantee and not of indemnity. One always looked Ltd [1982] 1 MLJ 64, it was similarly held, applying the principle to see if there was a primary and secondary obligation, or two in Bradford’s case, that the cause of action against a person primary obligations. Clause (1) of this document was a contract who stood as a surety for an overdraft facility only accrues when of guarantee. It was something which the customer ought to a demand for repayment is made to the surety. pay and had not paid … the whole burden of this document was that it was a guarantee, to come into force if the principal The cases of Bradford and Wee Kee Puan seem to propound debtor defaulted and to the extent of his default. This being the concept of indefinite liability whereas the highest courts in a guarantee as a whole, it was not enforceable against the other jurisdictions, such as India, Canada and Australia, subscribe guarantor, and the principle debtor was not liable because he to the principle of co-extensive liability. However, in all fairness, was an infant. the court in the two abovementioned cases did not have to deal with situations where the demand was made after the principal Conclusion debt had become time barred. Although it can be argued that a demand guarantee situation is Coming back to our hypothetical banker-borrower-surety allowed in Malaysia in light of the wordings in section 81 of the situation, if the debt by Borrower Y to Banker X had become Contracts Act 1950 “unless it is otherwise provided by the time barred on 1 July 1999, applying the strict principle of co- contract”, it is also arguable that in allowing such a demand extensiveness, likewise the demand made by Bank X on 1 guarantee situation to become an exception to section 81 of the Dec 2001 for the first time on Surety Z should not be valid or Contracts Act 1950 or the law of surety in the country, our courts enforceable. have also deviated away from the basic principle of “co-extensive liability” underlying the law of surety. In an October 2009 lecture entitled “On the hook? Release of the surety” by Timothy Fancourt QC of Falcon Chambers in In this regard, until there is a decision from our apex courts London (Vice-Chairman of the Chancery Bar Association), a very clarifying this position, or even possibly an amendment to the interesting point was mentioned by this learned author: Limitation Act 1953, the law in Malaysia appears to be that there is indefinite liability in a demand guarantee situation. The first issue in any case where a claim is to be made against a “surety” is therefore to decide what the surety covenants, On this note, it is the writer’s view that if financial institutions and to identify the nature of the claim that is to be brought wishes to overcome section 81 of the Contracts Act and hence the against the surety. Rather like the distinction between a licence principle of co-extensive liability to impose a primary obligation and a tenancy, the difference between a guarantee on the one on its surety, such clause must be made clear to the potential hand and a primary obligation or indemnity on the other is one sureties, bearing in mind that most people/sureties do not intend of substance and not mere language. If the substance of the to assume principal obligations or assume the responsibility of contract recognizes that there is another person who is primarily being liable indefinitely. liable to the creditor, and that the surety’s liability is dependent on default by that person, the contract is in substance one of guarantee, even if the phrase “as a principal debtor” appears in it. Similarly, any so-called indemnity or on-demand liability that gives rise to a claim that is co-extensive with and dependent on the liability of the defaulting principal is likely to be a guarantee in substance.
14 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 ASEAN Competition Law (in looseleaf format)
At least two (2) updates in 2011. Price excludes updates
With a population of over 600 million, ASEAN is fast emerging as a major Table of Contents economic trading block. To enhance regional economic performance, the ASEAN member states have committed to introducing respective nation- Part A – Review Of Competition Laws wide competition policy and law by 2015. A good understanding of Part B – Table Of Summary Decisions competition law is now essential for anyone doing business in the region and Part C – Legislation, Rules And Guidelines ASEAN Competition Law is primed to be the definitive guide to competition and antitrust law in ASEAN. General Editors Written by senior practising experts in the region, it demystifies competition law for businessmen, lawyers and policymakers by concisely examining and Dr R Ian McEwin analysing both existing and prospective competition laws in each country. Visiting Professor of Law, National University of Singapore Simple in language, ASEAN Competition Law not only explains the law but Senior Economic & Regulatory Advisor, Competition & Antitrust Practice provides step-by-step guidance on important procedural matters. Of Rajah & Tann LLP particular value to businessmen, lawyers and particularly corporate counsel operating across the region are the comparisons made between the different Kala Anandarajah ASEAN countries. References will also be made where relevant, to the Partner & Head, Competition & Antitrust and Trade Practice jurisprudence and policy issues from Australia, the United States and the Rajah & Tann LLP European Union, the last being the source from which most ASEAN competition law draws base. Editorial Team As this looseleaf title grows with its quarterly updates, the wealth of cases and expert commentary will make ASEAN Competition Law the foremost Rajah & Tann LLP source of competition law in the region - indispensable to any competition law practitioner.
Key Features
• Simple and complete coverage of competition law in all ASEAN member states. Each member state has its own dedicated chapter • Explains not only the principles of competition law in each jurisdiction but also its application and the role of the respective governing bodies RM responsible for enforcement of such laws For West • Includes competition law related legislation, rules and decrees for each 650 Malaysia member state of ASEAN, making it a one-stop reference for all RM • Table of Summary Decisions where available, gives users a rundown of For East the types of infringements there are and the penalties meted out in the 710 Malaysia circumstances ISBN 978-981-236-888-1
Log on to For Enquiry, please contact our www.lexisnexis.com/store/my Helpdesk at 1800-80-6374 or Follow us on Twitter @ to browse and purchase books online Email: [email protected] http://twitter.com/LexisNexisMY Features/Articles
Akta Orang Kurang Upaya 2008, Harapan dan Realiti: Satu Pendekatan Praktikal HUMAN oleh Mohammad Faizal Che Yusof
The writer is a sight-impaired lawyer di bangku sekolah hinggalah ke menara Pewartaan Akta Orang Kurang Upaya 2008 who practises in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, gading memberi bekalan semangat dan [Akta No 685] (“Akta OKU 2008”) pada after graduating with a law degree from kesedaran betapa pemahaman kepada 7 Julai 2008 membawa satu titik penting Universiti Malaya in 2000. Faizal is an active perundangan negara mampu membawa dalam perkembangan perundangan member of the Bar Council Human Rights penulis memperjuangkan hak-hak orang berkaitan OKU di negara ini. Usaha yang Committee and also a member of kurang upaya (“OKU”) dan berusaha telah dimulakan lewat 90-an ini hanya Malaysian Association for the Blind membawa golongan tersebut menikmati menampakkan hasilnya mulai Disember (“MAB”) and Persatuan Orang-orang Cacat hidup yang lebih sempurna. 2007 apabila Rang Undang-undang Penglihatan Islam Malaysia (“PERTIS”). OKU mulai dibentang di Dewan Rakyat. Faizal uses computerised software such Apatah lagi, cabaran dan rintangan tersebut Meskipun Akta OKU 2008 mempunyai as Jaws 11.0 for audio playback of screen tidak hanya terhad sewaktu menimba ilmu perbezaan ketara dengan draf awal yang and web-content. sama ada di sekolah mahupun universiti. mula diusulkan kepada kerajaan, setidak- tidaknya OKU kini mempunyai sandaran di kaca mata perundangan dari aspek pengiktirafan terhadap hak dan kebolehan mereka.
Harus juga diketahui bahawa Konvensyen Antarabangsa Berkaitan Orang Kurang Upaya yang telah ditandatangani oleh kerajaan Malaysia dan diratifikasikan turut mendorong kepada penggubalan Akta OKU 2008. Dalam artikel ini, penulis tidak berhasrat untuk memperinci konvensyen tersebut.
Penulis berpandangan bahawa Akta OKU 2008 secara jelas merupakan suatu dokumen perundangan yang menguatkan lagi hak OKU sebagai warganegara Malaysia yang dijamin oleh bahagian 2 Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Perkara- perkara 5 dan 8 yang menyentuh hak-hak kebebasan diri dan kesamarataan yang Mengharungi hidup sebagai seorang yang Kesulitan mendapatkan peluang kerja perlu diberikan kepada warganegara untuk kurang upaya penglihatan sejak kecil menambahkan lagi rasa kesungguhan dinikmati merupakan satu tapak kukuh adalah antara faktor yang mendorong di hati penulis untuk mempergunakan bagi memastikan kesejahteraan hidup penulis berusaha dengan sedaya mungkin keupayaan yang ada bagi menggiatkan OKU di Malaysia. Penulis berpendirian untuk memahami perundangan negara tugasan advokasi bagi manfaat OKU. bahawa jaminan yang termaktub dan seterusnya memastikan dirinya layak Justeru itu, artikel ini akan cuba membawa dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan ini untuk digelar sebagai peguamcara dan pembaca untuk memahami secara memastikan bahawa tidak boleh wujud peguambela. praktikal kedudukan undang-undang sebarang diskriminasi dari sudut undang- negara yang secara langsung menyentuh undang terhadap OKU. Pelbagai halangan dan rintangan yang isu-isu OKU. dialami sejak kecil termasuklah sewaktu
16 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
Selanjutnya Akta OKU 2008 dalam Selain dinyatakan dalam muqaddimah Pembangunan OKU memberi peluang muqaddimahnya jelas menyatakan di atas, penulis berpendapat definasi kenaikan pangkat dan gred gaji kepada bahawa pengiktirafan secukupnya ini menjadikan OKU suatu konsep penjawat sedia ada di Jabatan Kebajikan perlu diberikan kepada OKU tanpa ada yang bersifat hidup dan tidak statik. Ia Masyarakat. Nah! Ini adalah cabaran awal diskriminasi. Diperturunkan petikan menjadikan definasi kurang upaya itu kepada pengisian dan perlaksanaan Akta berkaitan daripada muqaddimah Akta boleh berkembang menurut peredaran OKU 2008 di mana mereka yang terlibat OKU 2008: waktu. Ini jelas dengan meneliti maksud adalah kumpulan sama yang terlibat “yang apabila berinteraksi dengan sebelum penggubalan Akta OKU 2008. MENGIKTIRAF sumbangan sedia pelbagai halangan” dalam definasi di atas. Sejauhmanakah penyusunan semula ini ada dan berpotensi yang bernilai dapat memberi kesan yang baik kepada yang dibuat oleh orang kurang Halangan semalam tidak serupa dengan pembangunan OKU yang sebelum ini upaya kepada kesejahteraan dan halangan hari ini. Begitulah seterusnya mendapat kritikan dan sungutan? kepelbagaian komuniti dan masyarakat halangan masa depan tentu sekali berbeza keseluruhannya: dengan halangan semasa. Justeru, Akta Demikian juga pembentukan Majlis OKU 2008 menghendaki masyarakat Kebangsaan OKU di bawah seksyen 3 MENGIKTIRAF kepentingan Malaysia benar-benar prihatin dan cakna Akta OKU 2008. Adakah perlantikan kebolehaksesan kepada persekitaran kepada keperluan seorang individu ahli-ahli majlis ini dan pandangan mereka fizikal, sosial, ekonomi dan kebudayaan, OKU untuk memenuhi keperluan dalam benar-benar dimanfaatkan atau ia sekadar kepada kesihatan dan pendidikan serta kehidupan. memenuhi keperluan statut semata-mata? kepada maklumat dan komunikasi, bagi Tambahan pula, dalam beberapa isu membolehkan penyertaan penuh dan Jika seseorang itu berupa insan biasa termasuklah sewaktu Malaysia meratifikasi berkesan orang kurang upaya dalam tanpa sebarang ketidakupayaan pada hari Konvensyen Antarabangsa Bagi Orang masyarakat: ini, belum tentu ia berupaya pada esok Kurang Upaya, ahli-ahli majlis tidak hari. Interaksi yang pelbagai pada hari ini dimaklumkan perihal beberapa artikel MENGIKTIRAF bahawa orang kurang boleh saja menjejaskan fizikal, mental, dari konvensyen tersebut yang digantung upaya adalah berhak kepada peluang intelektual dan deria seseorang dengan ratifikasinya oleh kerajaan Malaysia. dan perlindungan, serta bantuan pelbagai faktor hingga menjadikan ia sama rata dalam segala hal keadaan seorang OKU. Maka penulis amat prihatin Seterusnya penulis ingin membawa dan tertakluk hanya kepada apa-apa bila mana Pertubuhan Kesihatan Sedunia perhatian para pembaca kepada batasan, sekatan dan perlindungan hak (WHO) menyatakan bahawa hanya 10% peruntukan-peruntukan yang memberi sebagaimana yang diperuntukkan oleh populasi penduduk dunia terdiri dari hak dan jaminan kepada OKU. Perlembagaan Persekutuan: golongan OKU. Akses kepada bangunan dan Apa yang jelas muqaddimah Akta OKU Bagi berbincang secara lanjut mengenai pengangkutan 2008 membawa harapan kepada OKU peruntukan-peruntukan Akta OKU 2008, di negara ini bahawa adanya undang- penulis akan menyentuh beberapa perkara Dalam Akta OKU 2008, seksyen 26(1) telah undang yang memberikan hak dan termasuklah badan-badan yang dibentuk memperuntukkan hak kepada aksesibiliti jaminan kepada OKU untuk menikmati di bawah Akta OKU 2008 yang bertujuan kepada OKU sebagaimana berikut: hidup sebagaimana kehidupan insan lain. untuk memenuhi aspirasi Akta OKU 2008, Maka adalah penting untuk masyarakat beberapa peruntukan berkaitan hak-hak Orang kurang upaya hendaklah mengetahui siapakah OKU. OKU serta isu-isu di sekelilingnya. mempunyai hak untuk akses kepada dan menggunakan kemudahan, Adalah menjadi harapan penulis supaya Bagi memastikan objektif penggubalannya ameniti, perkhidmatan dan bangunan dengan mengetahui muqaddimah Akta berkesan, dua badan utama telah awam yang dibuka atau disediakan OKU 2008 dan definasi OKU, masyarakat dibentuk melalui peruntukan Akta OKU kepada orang ramai atas asas akan lebih faham dan tahu untuk 2008. Dua badan tersebut ialah Jabatan kesetaraan dengan orang upaya, tetapi memainkan peranan bagi membantu OKU Pembangunan Bagi Orang Kurang Upaya tertakluk kepada kewujudan atau meningkatkan keupayaan mereka untuk dan Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi Orang Kurang kemunculan apa-apa keadaan yang memberi sumbangan dalam masyarakat. Upaya. Dalam perlaksanaannya, kedua- boleh membahayakan keselamatan dua badan ini telah diletakkan di bawah orang kurang upaya. Akta OKU 2008 dalam seksyen 2 seliaan Kementerian Pembangunan mendefinasikan OKU sebagaimana berikut: Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat. Hasil Hak kepada aksesibiliti dan tempat awam dari penubuhan dua badan ini, jawatan- sebelumnya telah dimaktubkan dalam “orang kurang upaya” termasuklah jawatan baru telah dibentuk yang mana ia Undang-undang Kecil Bangunan Seragam mereka yang mempunyai kekurangan telah diisi oleh kakitangan-kakitangan dari (Pindaan) 1991 yang dibentuk di bawah jangka panjang fizikal, mental, Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat. Akta Bangunan, Saliran dan Jalan 1974. intelektual atau deria yang apabila Ia antara lain mewajibkan pemilik-pemilik berinteraksi dengan pelbagai halangan, Dalam satu taklimat yang pernah penulis bangunan awam dan pihak berkuasa boleh menyekat penyertaan penuh dan hadir, apa yang pasti penubuhan Jabatan tempatan memastikan setiap bangunan berkesan mereka dalam masyarakat;
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 17 Features/Articles
orang atau kanak-kanak upaya, Pekeliling 1988 dibuat disebabkan termasuk latihan vokasional dan kurangnya pengambilan OKU dalam pembelajaran sepanjang hayat. sektor awam. Umum mengetahui hanya Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat yang Dalam masa yang sama, peraturan mendahului jabatan-jabatan lain dalam 3 Akta Pendidikan 1996 telah pengambilan OKU yang kini telah melebihi mengadakan satu peruntukan yang dari satu peratus. mana kanak-kanak dikategorikan sebagai “educable” atau “non- Biarpun peruntukan undang-undang educable”. Peruntukan yang masih telah ada untuk memberi ruang kerjaya berkuatkuasa ini hanya memberi hak kepada OKU, OKU masih lagi menghadapi pendidikan kepada anak-anak kurang cabaran besar di sebalik pelbagai insentif upaya yang boleh dididik dan tiada hak yang ditawarkan kepada majikan yang kepada mereka yang dikatakan tidak bersedia mengambil OKU sebagai pekerja. boleh dididik. Langkah terbaik kini ialah OKU sendiri mesti bersikap kental dan bijak mencipta Konsep “educable” dan “non-educable” peluang untuk kerjaya sendiri. ini pada pemerhatian penulis amat subjektif. Ia lebih bergantung pada Bagi memastikan hak dan jaminan yang budibicara sesebuah institusi pendidikan diperuntukkan oleh Akta OKU 2008, Majlis iaini sekolah. Guru besar atau pengetua Kebangsaan OKU melalui seksyen 9 diberi yang prihatin akan sedaya mungkin kuasa untuk membuat apa-apa saranan memastikan seseorang anak kurang yang difikirkan perlu dan sesuai kepada awam boleh digunakan oleh OKU dengan upaya mendapat pendidikan asas. pihak kerajaan dan pihak berkaitan bagi mengadakan kelengkapan dan keperluan Sebaliknya guru besar dan pengetua memastikan hak dan jaminan kepada yang sesuai. yang lain akan mencipta pelbagai OKU benar-benar dapat dinikmati. Dalam alasan untuk tidak menerima anak-anak hal inilah amat perlu keupayaan Majlis Daripada aspek perlaksanaan, ia bukanlah kurang upaya. Bagaimanakah untuk Kebangsaan OKU dapat berfungsi dengan suatu perkara yang mudah. Antara kita mengharmonikan dua peruntukan baik dan berkesan. pertimbangan yang sering diketengahkan undang-undang yang saling bercanggah termasuklah kos yang terlibat dan ini? Dalam kesempatan yang terbatas ini, kepakaran yang ada bagi memenuhi tentu sekali penulis tidak dapat merungkai keperluan OKU. Dalam melaksanakan Akses kepada pekerjaan keseluruhan isi Akta OKU 2008 yang peruntukan ini, kerjasama perunding, banyak lagi isu boleh dibangkitkan. Penulis arkitek, kontraktor dan penguatkuasa Akta OKU 2008 turut memperuntukkan percaya secara sepintas lalu pembaca dapat amatlah mustahak. Tiadanya kerjasama hak OKU dapat diberi kerja, melakukan sedikit sebanyak mengetahui semangat dari salah satu pihak dalam rantaian ini aktiviti-aktiviti ekonomi lain termasuklah dan harapan penggubalan Akta OKU akan menjadikan peruntukan undang- berniaga dan berkoperasi. Ia dinyatakan 2008 serta isu yang menyelebunginya. undang yang ada sia-sia dan harapan OKU dalam seksyen 29(1) yang penulis terbiar tanpa dipenuhi. Begitu juga dengan perturunkan di bawah: Apa yang jelas, Akta OKU 2008 lebih akses kepada kemudahan pengangkutan bersifat satu dokumen pengisytiharan awam sebagaimana diperuntukkan Orang kurang upaya hendaklah hak. Dalam isu akses kepada bangunan, oleh seksyen 27(1). Pada pemerhatian mempunyai hak untuk akses kepada pengangkutan, pendidikan serta pekerjaan penulis, hak kepada aksesibiliti ini tambah pekerjaan atas asas kesetaraan dengan yang dibincang di atas, Akta OKU 2008 meruncing di luar bandar. orang upaya. tidak memberi hak penguatkuasaan ke atas mereka yang tidak mematuhi Akses kepada pendidikan Sekali lagi isu perlaksanaan seksyen peruntukan-peruntukan tersebut dan 29 menjadi persoalan kepada OKU. tidak memberi hak untuk menuntut Akta OKU 2008 juga melalui seksyen 28 Bukti kepada kebimbangan ini dapat remedi kepada OKU. (1) memperuntukkan sepertimana berikut: diperhatikan bila kerajaan terpaksa memberi nafas baru kepada Dasar Satu Selain mengharapkan pindaan kepada Orang kurang upaya tidak boleh Peratus Pekerjaan kepada OKU dalam Akta OKU 2008, penulis berpendirian dikecualikan daripada sistem pendidikan sektor awam. Ia dibuat pada 1 Apr 2008 bahawa adalah amat perlu untuk umum atas asas ketidakupayaan, dan melalui Pekeliling Baru Bilangan 3/2008 pengaplikasian undang-undang sedia ada kanak-kanak kurang upaya tidak boleh yang telah membatalkan Pekeliling termasuklah undang-undang pentadbiran, dikecualikan daripada pendidikan 10/1988. tort dan kontrak agar ia digunakan prasekolah, rendah, menengah dan dan diselaraskan bagi memastikan tinggi, atas asas kesetaraan dengan Difahamkan bahawa pekeliling baru keberkesanan penggubalan Akta OKU yang memberi penguatkuasaan semula 2008.
18 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011
Features/Articles
The 6th Annual International Bar Association Bar Leaders’ Conference — A Commentary
by Brendan Navin Siva
abuabusess is in fact a political position of support for the executive and the establishment and is far from being apolitical. He pointed out that to enjoy respect and influence, a Bar association should reremainm objective, factual and dispassionate in its approach to ississues.
HoHoracio Bernardes-Neto, the Vice-Chairman of the Bar Issues CCommission, commented that a practitioner who gets his ppermission to practise from the Supreme Court, which is eelected by the Executive, cannot be independent. Philip TTahmindjis, the Co-Director of the IBA Human Rights Institute aalso added that Bar associations must show leadership and mmust also sometimes show restraint in terms of timing and content of the positions taken.
The 2nd session was about rethinking the nature and structure of Bar associations. Stephen Zack, the President of the American Bar Association (“ABA”), gave context to the discussiondiscussion bby highlighting that ABA was the largest voluntary association in the USA with 400,000 members and 2,000 committees. He said the Theh6 6th AnnualA l International I t ti l Bar B Association A i ti Bar B Leaders’ L d ’ Conference C f was ABA employs emplo 1,000 employees including eight lobbyists. Linda Lee, the held on 25 and 26 May 2011 in Warsaw, Poland. The Conference was President of the Law Society of England and Wales, said that they have presented by the Bar Issues Commission of International Bar Association 1,500 full-time staff and 165,000 members. (“IBA”) in conjunction with the Polish Bar Council and the National Council of Legal Advisers of Poland. The panellists discussed the structure of Bar associations and provided their views about the advantages and disadvantages of their respective The issues discussed in each of the six sessions were most relevant and models which included representation in Bars based on (1) voluntary the discussions were extremely insightful and valuable. work; (2) a combined form of voluntary and paid work; and (3) a fully professional management and administration body. The 1st session was on the independence of Bar associations and their efforts to uphold the rule of law and speak out on human rights issues. The panellists overwhelmingly concluded that the preferred model is one A very well-written paper was presented by Sternford Moyo, the former where the leadership of the Bar association ought to be voluntary and by President of the Law Society of Zimbabwe and the South African actively practising lawyers whilst the functions and administration of the Development Community Lawyers Association. Sternford is presently the Bar association be run by professional and competent full-time staff. All Co-Chairperson of the Human Rights Institute of IBA. of them emphasised the need to invest in good full-time staff.
The central premise of his paper and presentation was that Bar Legal aid issues were also discussed, in particular funding for legal aid. associations across the globe should be wary of the use by governments The panellists agreed that public education about the importance and of professional regulation of legal practice and disciplinary proceedings value of legal aid is crucial to ensure that legal aid is adequately funded as instruments of repression against independent lawyers. He made by the government and the private sector. The Law Society of England reference to charges brought against lawyers for breach of professional and Wales has created a website www.soundoffforjustice.org to gather conduct, in particular, against those who litigate against the government public support against cuts in legal aid spending. to challenge repressive laws and speak out against violations of human rights and the rule of law. He also made the point that it is important that The 3rd session was on extraordinary rendition and whether Bar Bar associations must remain resolutely focused and resist the temptation associations are speaking out against such incidents and violations of of being intimidated into silence. Silence in the face of human rights the fundamental principles of the rule of law. Extraordinary rendition
20 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
is an extrajudicial process whereby a person is unrealisticunre and against the best interests of the client transferred from one jurisdiction to another notnot to speak to the media in certain circumstances, where it is able to conduct interrogation especiallyespe in high-profile cases. Just to prove his point outside the laws of that country. This session aboutabo new media, Mark Stephens was tweeting was especially poignant as it was discovered in tthroughouthr the sessions. 2005 that a site in Poland was being used by the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) to detain and ThThe panellists explained the use of media by interrogate terror suspects. The panellists described pprosecutors to shape public opinion and put their involvement in seeking the release of prisonerss ppressure on judges and also the use of the media held in such context and the efforts of the Polish Barar bby defence counsel to advocate their case. They to ascertain more information about the extraordinaryry aalso explained the various array of new media rendition process conducted within their country. tools which are shaping the public sphere and influencing the way media reports court matters. The 4th session was on electronic communications wiwithth courts and the costs associated with such moves. TheThe Kelli Sager, the Chairperson of the IBA’s Media Malaysian Bar had been invited to deliver a paper att thethe Law Committee, presentedpr her view that juries are not supposed to Conference for this session. This writer was asked to speak first to be completely ignorant of the events surrounding the case. She said that recount the issues and problems faced by the Bar during the early stages jurors have historically been required to know about their community as of implementation of electronic filing (“e-filing”) in the Kuala Lumpur a prerequisite. She said that in current times lawyers would be expected courts. This writer highlighted the various issues and problems that could to google their potential jurors and conduct a due diligence on each one have been avoided and were still being faced by Members of the Bar. of them before jury selection. This was followed by a presentation by the Polish Bar Council of the various electronic communication mechanisms they had implemented Mark Stephens was then asked about his views as to how to deal in the last two years. Most of their initiatives were for run-of-the-mill with the media. Mark has been in the limelight recently as the solicitor matters which were more procedural in nature. It was interesting to representing Julian Assange. He said the most important thing the client note that, for e-filing, the filing fees were lowered to about a quarter needs to understand is that they will never have control over the media of the normal filing fees. Thereafter, a panellist from Austria described and cannot guarantee a positive report or news item. Dealing with the the country’s experience with e-filing which started 20 years ago. He media is like riding a tiger. Lawyers must, in high-profile cases, discuss said crucially it was a joint venture between the government and the with the clients at the very outset how to deal with the media. He said Bar to improve the system of administration of justice in Austria. He the strongest argument against the traditional view that lawyers should said he believed this consultative and collaborative process ensured that not speak to the media is the consequences of not doing so in such cases. the system was accepted and fully employed by all lawyers and courts. If the lawyer does not comment or say something about the case, the He said that it was their experience in the long run that the secured press and media will fill the vacuum with comments from others which electronic communication was far cheaper than normal post. Later, after may be negative and detrimental to the interests of the client. the session was over, this writer was pleased to hear that some of the members of the audience found the presentation to be very useful as The panellists also were of the view that a good working relationship e-filing was being introduced in their jurisdictions later this year. with the media is essential as well as a good understanding of how the media works. For example, it is important to be aware of deadlines and The 5th and 6th sessions were about the influence of the internet and the news cycles. It is also important to be aware of the relative brevity of a press on court proceedings. These sessions were certainly an eye opener statement to the media as they will not carry long statements and require as they challenged the traditional notion that lawyers should not speak sound bytes that are instantly understandable by the general public. to the media and that the use of the media may not be consistent with ethical principles and legal rules for judges and lawyers. The panellists In the last session, Mark described the Julian Assange case and the spoke openly and forcefully against the traditional notion as times have handling of the media and the portrayal of his client in the media. changed and media reach and exposure are so great that it would be
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 21 Features/Articles
Unwinding a Winding Up? A Commentary on Megah Teknik Sdn Bhd v Miracle Resources Sdn Bhd
by Lee Shih
The law allows the court to discovered himself to be exercise its discretion to set blacklisted by a financial aside a court order under institution. specific circumstances, for instance, where an In the unreported grounds order was granted in the of judgment (Miracle absence of one party, or Resources Sdn Bhd v where there has been Megah Teknik (M) Sdn a contravention of a Bhd [2008] 1 LNS 362), substantial provision of the High Court held it law. was bound by the Court of Appeal decision in In the case of a winding Vijayalakshmi Devi d/o up order, the authorities Nadchatiram v Jegadevan suggest a court has no s/o Nadchatiram & jurisdiction to set aside Ors [1995] 1 MLJ 830 a winding-up order. (“Vijayalakshmi”). That Instead, an applicant must decision held that a apply for a stay of the winding-up order cannot winding-up order under be discharged or rescinded the Companies Act 1965 (“Act”). However, it can be argued after it was made. The only remedy a wound-up company had that the court still has some limited jurisdiction to set aside a was to apply for a stay of the winding-up pursuant to section 243 winding-up order when it can be shown to be null and void due of the Act. In deciding so, the High Court declined to follow other to illegality or a lack of jurisdiction. High Court authorities, which allowed for the setting aside of a winding-up order. These principles will be considered in light of the Court of Appeal decision in Megah Teknik Sdn Bhd v Miracle Resources Sdn Bhd The Court of Appeal [2010] 4 MLJ 651 (“Megah Teknik”). This decision was affirmed by the Federal Court (unreported judgment dated 13 Oct 2010 in The Court of Appeal adopted the approach of the High Court Federal Court Civil Application No 02(i)-29-2009). in upholding the decision of Vijayalakshmi. It was pointed out in Vijayalakshmi, and noted in Megah Teknik, that there are no Brief facts at the High Court express provisions in the Act or the Companies (Winding up) Rules 1972 (“Rules”) that allow for a setting aside or variation of a The Court of Appeal decision arose from a decision of the Kuala winding-up order. This is unlike the English Insolvency Rules 1986, Lumpur High Court dismissing an application to set aside a which contain such a provision. winding-up order. In Megah Teknik, the Court of Appeal held that a court could not The petitioning company (“Petitioner”) presented a winding-up invoke the general provision under the Rules of the High Court petition against the respondent company (“Company”). It failed 1980 allowing for the setting aside of an order made in default. to enter an appearance and failed to file an affidavit to oppose This was because the Act set out specific provisions pertaining to the petition. The court therefore made a winding-up order winding up, including a stay of a winding up though it was silent against the Company. about allowing for a setting aside. Hence, the proper remedy in Megah Teknik was to apply for a stay under section 243 of the Almost a year later, the Company filed an application to set Act or to appeal against the winding-up order. aside the winding-up order. The Company explained that it did not have knowledge of the winding-up proceedings and only However, the Court of Appeal did leave the door open for a became aware of the winding-up order when one of its directors possible exercise of inherent jurisdiction to set aside a winding-up
22 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
order under certain circumstances. The Court of Appeal did not of the winding-up petition. Such an argument did not arise in explicitly list out these circumstances but adopted the Federal Megah Teknik since the procedural requirements were complied Court decision of Badiaddin bin Mohd Mahidin & Anor v Arab with. Malaysian Finance Bhd [1998] 1 MLJ 393 (“Badiaddin”). It was held by the Federal Court that there was inherent jurisdiction to There are crucial differences between a stay and a setting aside set aside an order where there was a contravention that defied of a winding up. a “substantive statutory prohibition so as to render the defective order null and void on ground of illegality or lack of jurisdiction”. While a stay of a winding-up order amounts to a total discontinuance of the winding-up proceedings, there are several The Federal Court hurdles in applying for such a stay. The interests and views of the creditors, contributories and the liquidators must be taken into Leave to appeal to the Federal Court against the Court of account in assessing whether a stay should be granted. Appeal decision was allowed. The question of law was whether a winding-up order could be set aside when obtained in the For a setting aside, however, such a test would not be relevant absence of the respondent company. However, the Federal Court because the focus would be on whether the winding-up order felt it was not proper to address the question as the Petitioner was was granted illegally or with lack of jurisdiction. Further, for a not present and was not represented by solicitors. While declining stay, the records with the Companies Commission of Malaysia to answer the question of law, the Federal Court nonetheless would still reflect the winding up but that it was now stayed. For also held that there was no merit in the appeal and dismissed the a setting aside, there would not have been a valid winding-up appeal. This meant that the Court of Appeal decision in Megah order in the first place and the records should not reflect any Teknik was upheld. winding up.
Commentary For the reasons discussed above, it is submitted that the court ought to have jurisdiction to set aside a winding-up order. The upshot of Megah Teknik is that in general, one can only apply Echoing the words of Mohd Azmi FCJ in Badiaddin, circumstances to stay a winding-up order. In circumstances like Megah Teknik, may exist where there is a “real need to set aside the defective where the winding-up order was obtained in default, this decision order to enable to Court to do justice”. suggests that there is no recourse to apply for a setting aside. It is a pity that the Federal Court in Megah Teknik missed out However, the Court of Appeal recognised that there would on the opportunity to clarify whether a court can set aside still be circumstances where the court can exercise its inherent a winding-up order and the specific circumstances in which it jurisdiction to set aside a winding-up order. Such circumstances would do so. could be where there was illegality or lack of jurisdiction. For instance, there may have been breaches in complying with the This article was first published in LEGAL INSIGHTS Issue 1/2011 requirements under the Act and the Rules. Those breaches may and is reproduced with the permission of Messrs SKRINE. have resulted in a respondent company not even having notice
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 23 Features/Articles
Long Call Speech Delivered on 8 Apr 2011 by High Court Judge, YA Tuan Abang Iskandar b Abang Hashim (The speech is reproduced verbatim.)
Salam sejahtera saya ucapkan kepada semua yang hadir. the United States was once asked whom he would want to invite for dinner if he was given one shot at selecting that one special Terlebih dahulu secara khususnya, saya ingin ucapkan terima person. kasih kepada peguam-peguam pengusul yang hadir bagi mengusul petisyen setiap Pempetisyen. Ucapan terima kasih juga kepada wakil-wakil bagi pihak Peguam Negara, Majlis Peguam Malaysia dan Jawatankuasa Peguam KL/Selangor yang hadir bagi pihak badan-badan berkenaan. Terima kasih dan tahniah juga saya ucapkan kepada ibu bapa dan ahli keluarga atas kejayaan pemetisyen2 dan rakan2 kepada semua pemetisyen kerana hadir pada hari ini. Izinkan saya memberikan beberapa kata-kata yang lazim saya ucapkan di upacara seperti ini.
We are gathered here today to celebrate with you, the Petitioners, on your happy occasion today with your loved ones on your proud achievement. By your presence today, it has been established that all of you are proven to be fit and proper persons to be called lawyers and in due course and duly armed with a practicing certificate, will then be able to practice and begin your career in the realm of the law. I may stand to be corrected, but they say it is a lucrative practice.
I am sure that every single one of you has something that you are exceptionally good at. You may have a special talent for understanding a specific area of the legal practice. It is therefore your duty to hone such talent if you have already discovered what it is that you are good at. If you are exceptionally good in a specific area of the law in your practice, you may even create a niche for yourself and you would be able to provide quality service to your clientele.
Your journey in the legal practice is just about to begin. In the course of your impending practice as a counsel acting for your client, you will be well advised to always remember that in He answered it would be Mahatma Gandhi, whom we all know, as much as you owe a duty to your client in the discharge of besides being a great mortal and thinker and an indefatigable/ your duty as such, you are also accountable as officers of the unfaltering fighter for justice, was incidentally a lawyer by training Court in ensuring that the proper administration of justice is not and a practicing one as well, in the early part of his professional sacrificed. The ever present demands for honesty, integrity, truth life that was spent in Durban, South Africa. Going back quickly and fairness will always remain at all times, a constant. This, to my to the anecdote involving President Obama, he said Gandhi was mind, is rightly so and society has every right to expect that from his choice because Gandhi was such an inspiration to a great lawyers, including all of you. many leaders of men who would come after him and by the fact that Gandhi had “changed the world just by the power of This leads me to another truism which is this. As you will soon his ethics.” A legal practitioner who does not give due respect discover, which I am sure you all will, sooner rather than later, or who just bestows scant regard to ethics, can be likened to a legal practice cannot, like any other professional and honourable walking man without his soul. Any man of reason would concur callings, be separated from ethics. President Barrack Obama of that there is no value in that as a useful take-away. Ethics, it has been said, makes a person whole. Likewise, a strict adherence
24 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 to and observance of the high standard of ethical conduct will ultimately define your career in the honourable practice of the law. Honour, humility and trust are worthwhile qualities that are so inherently intertwined within the DNA both of legal practice framework and the constituent make-up of men and women who overtly profess to practice the honourable profession. Their Intellect Book Marketing coexistence can only be described as symbiotic. Take away any one of those 3 qualities in one of them, the other one is automatically rendered nugatory, so incapable of earning the society’s respect (since 1984) and trust that together form the bedrock of their coexistence.
I am sure each and every one of you, the Petitioners, had charted the course for your career path as a lawyer and probably had even visualized the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow in the horizon awaiting you as your just reward. There is nothing wrong with that. Success always starts off as a dream. With consistent hard work, I am sure too that all of you can and will make it through successfully in your chosen career. There is just no excuse for not trying. That much you owe, if not to anyone else, at least you owe it to yourself.
Having said that, you will be doing a great service to your profession by contributing positively to your community and society at large. Take a bit of time off the serious legal work to be involved in a worthy cause of your choice. Wisdom tells us that giving and sharing can be a greater and a nobler act than just receiving all the time. A wise sage once was heard to have said that anything that is not shared is lost forever. You can only be enriched, on a personal level, by occasional indulgences in such selfless exercise.
Today, in fact just a few minutes ago, we all had heard in this courtroom that all the petitioners had recognized the love and s ,EADING STOCKIST OF LOCAL AND FOREIGN understanding that their loved ones and their masters and LAW BOOKS colleagues had showered on them which had immensely assisted them in becoming what they are today. Let these wholesome and s -AJOR IMPORTERS OF )NDIAN ,AW "OOKS positive values remain as a burning flame in each of your hearts s !LL )NDIA 2EPORTER n and be the driving force in shaping the directions that you will invariably have to make as you move ahead in your career and in n $6$ 2OM your lives henceforth. s 3ECONDHAND SETS OF MAJOR WORKS With those gentle exhortations from me, which I sincerely hope s 3UBSCRIPTION AGENTS will assist you, as a little reminder in the backburner, when you have to make the numerous yet inevitable decisions in the s #ONVEYANCING FORMS course of your impending longish journey, may I again take this opportunity to once again wish all of you and your respective n .,# ! ! . " ' families every success. To the Petitioners, may all of you have a $ rewarding, a glittering and more importantly a most satisfying career, in the practice of the law. n 0$3 n 0OWER OF !TTORNEY Saya sudahi dengan ucapan tahniah sekali lagi kepada anda semua dan keluarga anda sekalian. s !GENT FOR 0.-" 0ERCETAKAN .ASIONAL -ALAYSIA "HD Terima kasih. 4HE 'OVERNEMENT 0RINTERS ABANG ISKANDAR BIN ABANG HASHIM High Court Judge RKKK 1 14, 1st Floor, Jalan Bunus Enam, 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Kuala Lumpur Tel: 03.2693.8260, 03.2698.7005, 03.2694.7206 Fax: 03.2693.1826 Email: [email protected] Features/Articles
Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan Getting Ready to Begin Operations
by Rajen Devaraj and photos by Jason Kay
about this new scheme and become familiar with the logistic and administrative procedures involved. Trainings on the law are also included to provide for those who might not have handled criminal matters before.
In the past three months, with the cooperation and assistance of state bar committees and legal aid centres, the following trainings have been conducted: (1) Kuala Lumpur on 26 March; (2) Terengganu on 2 April; (3) Perak on 16 April; (4) Kuala Lumpur/Selangor on 23 April; Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) or the National (5) Kelantan on 14 May; Legal Aid Foundation (“NLAF”), will provide free legal assistance (6) Penang on 28 May; to all Malaysians at the police station, the remand hearing and (7) Sabah on 4 June; when they are charged in court (irrespective of their financial (8) Selangor on 18 June; and means). Insofar as hearings are concerned, a means test will be (9) Negeri Sembilan/Malacca on 25 June. applied and only those who pass the means test will qualify to receive legal representation from YBGK. So far, a total of 302 lawyers in Peninsular Malaysia and 27 lawyers in Sabah have attended this programme. The programme The Bar Council Ad Hoc Committee on the National Legal Aid in Sabah was organised in collaboration with the Sabah Law Foundation has been working hard these past few months, Association. conducting trainings and assisting the Bar Council State Legal Aid Centres to put in place a system that would allow them to aid Garis Panduan bagi Pegawai Penguat Kuasa Berkaitan YBGK in its delivery of services. dengan Tangkapan dan Reman
Toll-free numbers An important dimension of the training is to introduce participants to the “Garis Panduan bagi Pegawai Penguat Kuasa Berkaitan In order to make it easy for the public and enforcement agencies dengan Tangkapan dan Reman” (Guidelines for Enforcement to deal with YBGK, two toll-free numbers will be established — Officers with regard to Arrest and Remand) (“Garis Panduan”) 180088YBGK for voice call and 130088YBGK for fax. that is supposed to apply in situations of arrest and remand.
In Peninsular Malaysia, these two toll-free numbers will link up All enforcement agencies, and not just the police, are expected to to a telephone and fax line located in each state legal aid centre. comply with this Garis Panduan. If a person makes a call from Kuala Lumpur to 180088YBGK, the call will automatically be routed to Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre This Garis Panduan needs to be read together with article 5 of the whereas if a person makes a call from Perak to 180088YBGK, the Federal Constitution and section 28A of the Criminal Procedure call will automatically be routed to Perak Legal Aid Centre. Code (“CPC”). Listed below are some of the salient provisions found in the Garis Panduan: It is anticipated that this telephone system will be operational in (1) The arresting officer must inform the suspect of the grounds early August. of his/her arrest; (2) Before commencing any form of questioning or recording of Training any statement, the officer-in-charge must: (a) inform the family or friend of the suspect about the One-day trainings are being conducted state by state so that arrest; and lawyers who intend to do YBGK work receive basic information
26 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Features/Articles
(b) inform the suspect of his/her right to legal representation. It is important to point out that this Garis Panduan is to be If the suspect has his/her own lawyer, he/she should be followed in relation to all arrests involving Malaysians, even when given an opportunity to contact the lawyer using the the arrested person opts to engage his/her own lawyer and YBGK telephone. If the suspect does not have his/her own is not involved. lawyer, the officer-in-charge must contact YBGK and allow the suspect to inform YBGK about his/her arrest; We need your support (3) The officer-in-charge must send a fax to YBGK or the lawyer of the suspect’s choice. The fax must provide basic The establishment of YBGK provides, for the first time, a information in relation to the arrest including the report comprehensive and sustainable legal aid programme for those number, the grounds of the arrest and the name of the entangled in the criminal justice system. It will make a real investigating officer; difference in the lives of thousands of Malaysians who are arrested and charged in court. (4) The officer-in-charge must also inform YBGK or the lawyer of choice about any change in the circumstances of the arrested It is hoped that YBGK, with the assistance of state legal aid person, ie if he/she is being moved to a different location, centres, will be able to commence the arrest and remand part of if he/she is going to be remanded, if he/she is going to be its services before the end of July. charged or if he/she is going to be released;
(5) The need for the officer-in-charge to inform the family In order to make this work, we require the assistance and support or friend or inform the suspect of his/her right to legal of Members of the Bar. representation will not apply in a situation where section 28A(8) of the CPC is invoked; We call on Members to register to do YBGK work. Thus far, some (6) The fax to YBGK or the lawyer of choice providing basic 490 Members of the Bar have already signed up but we need information in relation to the arrest has to be sent even in a more numbers if we are to reach out to all those arrested and situation where section 28A(8) is invoked; and cover the large number of criminal trials in the system. (7) In a situation where section 28A(8) is not invoked, the officer- in-charge must allow the YBGK lawyer or the lawyer of choice For further information about YBGK or to register, kindly contact to meet with the suspect in a reasonable place — in sight of Kamala Thakar Singh at the Bar Council Secretariat by telephone the officer-in-charge but where the conversation cannot be at 03-2050 2098 or by email at [email protected]. heard.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 27 31 of the best tax minds in Singapore have come together to author and bring us The Law and Practice of Singapore Income Tax Who W ill Bene fit Technical Editors • Tax Professionals • Chief Financial PokSoyYoong, Ng Keat Seng&Steven M Timms Offi • In House Counsel cers • TaxLawyers
“It is our hope that successive generations ofthe tax Table of Contents community will ‘Wikipedia’thisbook into themost authoritative book on Singapore taxation. ” Chapter 1 Framework of interpretation in tax – Pok Soy Yoong Chapter 2 Case law guidance on source of business and trade income “As the tax authority, mycolleagues andIsee ourselves Chapter 3 Capital and revenue divide - Receipts playing a keyroleinimprovingtheprofessionalstandards of Chapter 4 Capital and revenue divide - Expenditures tax practiceinSingapore. But we cannotdo this alone.We Chapter 5 Relevance of accountancy principles and can perform thisrolewell by creating an environmentto practices encourage learning andsharing ofknowledgeand Chapter 6 Capital allowances expertise,likewedoinputtingthisbooktogether. Chapter 7 Withholding tax and taxation of non-residents ” Chapter 8 Corporate restructuring, mergers and – Moses Lee, acquisitions Commissioner of Inland Revenue Singapore in his foreword Chapter 9 Capital market transactions to the book Chapter 10 Hedge funds and private equity activities Chapter 11 Unit trusts Chapter 12 Intellectual property Chapter 13 Wealth management for individuals Chapter 14 Banking operations RM Chapter 15 Financial derivatives 742.56 Chapter 16 Insurance operations Chapter 17 Tax treaties Chapter 18 Case law guidance on controversies in transfer
pricing
264 Chapter 19 Source of employment income ,
Chapter 20 Employee stock options and share schemes 1•pp1 Chapter 21 Taxation and non-taxation measures for
- sustainable development in Singapore 833 Order Now!
- Chapter 22 Tax avoidance 236 via our eBookstore @
- www.lexisnexis.com/ Chapter 23 Investigations and audits
981
- Chapter 24 Objections and appeals
8
7 store/my/ SN9 ISBN
Log on to For Enquiry, please contact our www.lexisnexis.com/store/my Helpdesk at 1800-80-6374or Follow us on Twitter @ to browse and purchase books online Email: [email protected] http://twitter.com/LexisNexisMY Events
Disruption Day Workshop (15 Apr 2011) by Editor and photo by Mazni Ibrahim
A workshop entitled “Disruption Day” was undertaken on 15 Apr 2011 to inspire a new direction for the Malaysian Law Conference (“MLC”), now rebranded as the International Malaysia Law Conference (“IMLC”). Workshop participants were a mixture of Bar Council members, senior members of the Bar and the TBWA\Tequila consulting team.
The main objectives were to define the role of the MLC in achieving a longer term communications vision for Bar Council, viz-à-viz to establish “where we are today”, explore how we want to be seen in the future and how the MLC can play a role in that evolution. Through innovative exercises — “Conventioneering” and “Visioneering” — participants were led to uncover issues that would lead to hot topics to attract local and international delegates as well as the Malaysian press and public.
Disruption Day as a whole was quite an insightful and eye-opening session for Members of the Bar who participated, since it allowed for a no-nonsense examination of the future of the Bar and Bar Council, and a frank look at the inevitable result of stagnant growth and possible ways it could be overcome.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 29 Events
Visit to Singapore Coroner’s Court and Maxwell Chambers, and Informal Meeting with Law Society of Singapore (29 Apr to 1 May 2011, Singapore)
by Editor and photos by Andrew Khoo and Editor
During the Malaysia/Singapore Bench and Bar Games (“Games”) held over the Labour Day weekend in Singapore, Bar Council members took the opportunity to conduct a few meetings of our own.
In line with Bar Council’s own proposal for Malaysia to establish a Coroner’s Court (a Bar Resolution was passed in its favour at the March 2011 Annual General Meeting and in relation to which the former Chief Judge of Malaya, Tan Sri Siti Norma and the Parliamentary Select Committee had previously reached a consensus), the first visit was to the Singapore Coroner’s Court. Accompanied by the Chief Judge of Malaya, YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria; and Federal Court Judge, YA Dato’ Seri Md Raus b Sharif; Bar Council members were introduced to the workings of Singapore’s new Coroners Act and informed of the challenges faced by the setup of this new institution.
Subsequently, accompanied by our Chief Justice of Malaysia, YAA Tun Dato’ Seri Zaki b Tun Azmi, we visited the impressive expanse of Maxwell Chambers, Centre for International Arbitration Centre, which same building houses the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”), chambers of various international arbitrators and other alternative dispute resolution institutions. We were briefed on the Singapore’s arbitration regime and found it useful to see for ourselves what makes Singapore the present favoured dispute resolution centre in Asia.
On the final day of the Games, prior to the gala dinner at the Orchid Country Club, Bar Council members and Council members of the Law Society of Singapore sat down for an informal dialogue to discuss common areas of Interest, including recent developments in court procedure and practice directions, the progress of Singapore’s Compulsory Legal Education programme, and recent liberalisation announcements.
Some of the Bar Council Secretariat staff also visited their counterparts at the Law Society of Singapore to exchange views and information relating to membership, compliance and practice areas.
We acknowledge and thank our Singaporean friends for their kind hospitality and generosity in sharing their ideas, knowledge and experience.
30 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011
Events
Dinner-and-Dialogue with Members of Parliament (21 June 2011)
by Chua Ai Lin and photos by Bar Council Malaysia
YB Tuan Manogaran s/o Marimuthu, YB Dr Mohd Hatta Md Ramli, YB Tuan Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff, YB Tuan Mohsin Fadzli b Haji Samsuri, YB Puan Nurul Izzah bt Anwar, YB Tuan Sim Tong Hin, YB Tuan Sivarasa s/o K Rasiah, YB Dr Tan Seng Giaw, YB Dato’ Haji Tajuddin b Abdul Rahman and YB Tuan Tan Tee Beng. YB Puan Teresa Kok sent her apologies through her representatives, Adriene Leong and Alice Lan, who attended on her behalf.
To start off the dinner, the Renaissance’s Combination Platter was served and everyone dug in heartily, in between conversation with their neighbours. Thirty-five minutes and three subsequent courses later, Lim Chee Wee was invited on the stage to deliver his presentation.
He first drew the guests’ attention to some of the more prominent projects Bar Council has been involved in over the past years, such as the Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”), MyConsti campaign and the Common Bar Course. This was to refute the allegations that have been dogging Bar Council for many years. “Contrary to the common perception, On 21 June 2011, Bar Council was honoured to play host to Bar Council does so much more that just issue press statements Members of Parliament (“MPs”) and invited guests at a dinner- and organise walks to the Palace of Justice,” he jested, drawing and-dialogue session at the Renaissance Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. amused laughter from the crowd. Representatives from Bar Council consisted of Lim Chee Wee, Christopher Leong and Tony Woon (President, Vice-President The second half of Lim Chee Wee’s presentation concentrated and Secretary of the Malaysian Bar, respectively), Rajen Devaraj on issues relating to courts and the legal system, including the and Chin Oy Sim (Chief Executive Officer and Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the Bar Council Secretariat, respectively) and six other Council members.
Guest registration started off slow but picked up soon after 7:15 pm. YB Dr Tan Seng Giaw and Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Khalid Ahmad b Sulaiman (Chairman of the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board) were among the early arrivals to sign in the guestbook. As more guests arrived and were shown to the dinner hall, utterances of “YB” were heard repeatedly underneath the crystal chandeliers as everyone exchanged greetings and handshakes.
The MPs who braved the infamous Golden Triangle traffic jam to attend the event were YB Chua Soon Bui, YB Puan Fong Po Kuan, YB Puan Hajjah Fuziah bt Salleh, YB Tuan Gwo-Burne Loh, YB Tuan Hee Loy Sian, YB Tuan Dr Hiew King Cheu, YB Jeff Ooi Chuan Aun (representing YB Tuan Liew Chin Tong), YB Dato’ Johari b Abdul, YB Datuk Liew Vui Keong, YB Datin Linda Tsen Thau Lin, YB Tuan M Kulasegaran s/o Murugeson,
32 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”), e-filing system and court Parliament must change”. He advocated the practice of recording and transcribing system (“CRT”). separation of powers and law reform for the benefit of the younger generations. He concluded with how Bar Council and MPs can work together. In terms of what the Malaysian Bar can offer YB Dato’ Haji Tajuddin, while acknowledging that the objective Parliamentarians, Lim Chee Wee conveyed the Malaysian Bar’s of Bar Council in organising the dinner and dialogue was noble, willingness to assist by speaking at briefings on areas of law and it needed to ponder over the reasons why so many of the ruling proposed legislation, drafting proposed legislation and helping party MPs turned down the invitations. He also cautioned those with policy/position papers. asking for reform for the sake of reform, for there was no guarantee that change would make tomorrow better. He informed the guests that the Bar looks to MPs to advocate the establishment of permanent select committees with Towards the end, the dialogue shifted to the upcoming BERSIH oversight of government ministries and legislation, and wide 2.0 rally, scheduled to be held on 9 July 2011. YB Dr Hatta consultation prior to introducing new legislation. He urged requested Bar Council to procure an international observer the MPs to call for law reform, such as amendment of the for the assembly, a sentiment which was echoed by YB Puan Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, and repeal of Hajjah Fuziah, in her hope to see a peaceful gathering without preventive detention laws and other oppressive laws. He also interference from the authorities, an experience she had highlighted another item on the Malaysian Bar’s wish list, encountered overseas. namely that the annual report of SUHAKAM — the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia — and the state of human rights Bar Council thanks the MPs and invited guests for gracing in Malaysia, be debated in Parliament. the dinner and dialogue with their presence and hopes that the dinner-and-dialogue soirée will become an annual affair, During the dialogue session that followed, YB Tuan Manogaran allowing the exchange of views and ideas. asserted that “for things to change in the country, the
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 33 Events
4th Young Lawyers Convention (1 to 3 July 2011)
Compiled by Vince Chong Khin Young* and photos by Norfazlinda Alimad and Kenny Lai Choe Ken
The Young Lawyers Convention remuneration to quality of work. He Session 1: Liberalisation of the Bar — (“Convention”) was originally envisaged further illustrated that the Convention is Are you ready for a liberalised Bar? to be a mere platform for young lawyers geared towards the making of a better to meet and exchange views. Today, Bar. A better Bar, would mean better Moderator: Tony Woon three conventions later, the Convention laws. And better laws would, in turn, Speakers: George Varughese, Mureli has evolved into the zenith of a young lead to better governance; which will Navaratnam and Desmond Ho lawyer (“YL”)’s calendar. Attracting ultimately lead to a better nation. In his 130 YLs from all over Malaysia, the 4th words, it all begins at the Convention. The session began with George Convention marks the beginning of providing an insight in a lecture-styled- empowerment of this generation’s YLs. This was followed by the welcoming presentation on what delegates should address from the Vice-President of the expect in a liberalised bar. In particular, The launch of the Convention Malaysian Bar, Christopher Leong, who George provided an insight on Bar expressed his gratitude to see a myriad Council’s proposals to the powers- Assisted by the Malacca Young Lawyers mixture of YLs from different states of that-be; proposals meant to ensure Committee, the 4th Convention began the country attending the Convention. gradual liberalisation. Nevertheless, with the opening address by Richard it became clear to the delegates that Wee, Chairperson of the National Young The keynote address was delivered by RR any form of liberalisation has a huge Lawyers Committee (“NYLC”). Setting Chelvarajah; one of the longest-serving impact on the legal fraternity. George the tone for the Convention, Richard Council members from Malacca. In his assured the delegates and reminded began by cautioning the delegates on punctuated and distinguished tone, he them that liberalisation is a process that the imminent liberalisation of the Bar reminded the delegates that Bar Council is imminent and that lawyers must learn and its effects on YLs. He explained subscribes to the rule of law and that to embrace it as it will increase business that “Towards a Better Bar” is meant the Malaysian Bar is the only professional and job opportunities and also add an to focus on the improvement and body vigilant against the erosion of international element in our local legal the empowerment of a YL both on liberty in the country. He urged the community. an intellectual level and on a core- delegates to always remember that. He competency level. It also encompasses officially launched the Convention. Mureli shared his views on the impact YLs’ working conditions from bare of liberalisation. He explained that
34 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
since many multinational companies in lectures, attending CPD classes and even remains relevant as it is now stronger Penang have a resident in-house counsel taking a Master’s degree in law. than ever as the number of Members who is a national of the companies’ should equate to a more persuasive say home country, Penang lawyers are now Dipendra explained that in recent from the Bar. required to adapt to the different legal times, due to the sudden emergence cultures when dealing with their in-house of universities in Malaysia that offer law Justice Mah then stressed that YLs counterparts. In that regard, Penang degrees, the competition will be stiff. should imbue a love for the profession lawyers have had the need to improve He opined that in order to fend off the and a need to uphold human rights and themselves in both knowledge and competition, lawyers must improve the principle of natural justice as these skill in order to remain competitive and themselves and embrace the introduction are the principles of many giants of the marketable. Continuing legal education is of the CPD course as it is designed to Bar, such as Ahmad Ibrahim, Ronald paramount to every lawyer. improve and make one a better lawyer. Reynold, Yong Shook Lin, Chooi Mun Sou, Cyrus Das, Gopal Sri Ram, Ambiga Desmond rounded up the session Steven illustrated the importance of Sreenevasan, Manjit Singh, Karpal with an insight on the Limited Liability having a culture of “perpetuation of Singh and Raja Aziz Addruse. Providing Partnership Bill. He warned that the quality” by drawing references to the an insight to their stories, Justice Mah competition in the legal community is fact that the UK has seen many a great illustrated how these individuals are truly now more competitive and with time, judge from one generation to the next. giants of the Bar. the competition will begin in one’s own He highlighted that Malaysian lawyers are practice; amongst his colleagues in the too cocooned in their comfort zone and Naturally, the pertinent question is how same firm. He urged the delegates to warned that as globalisation bears upon does one proceed from this point to continue improving their standard of us, lawyers should instead be constantly nurture YLs to become giants in their English and knowledge of the law. improving ourselves and the best way to own right? Justice Mah answered: do so is through CPD courses. Session 2: Professional Development Commitment in what you want to Classes — Empowering the 21st Session 3: Inspiring Stories — Giants do. It is a vocation, love for the law, Century Lawyer of the Bar burning desire in you to uphold justice, to do what you know is right, not just Moderator: Janet Chai Speaker: JC Mah Weng Kwai sit back, but be proactive. Speakers: Steven Thiru, Raphael Tay and HR Dipendra Tasked with perhaps the toughest session The learned Judge urged YLs to actively in the Convention, Justice Mah rose to participate in Bar Council activities. The session began with a revelation the occasion to inspire and empower the that Bar Council has been pushing for YLs of the Convention. He ended his speech with two parting a new compulsory system of continued words of wisdom. One seems to be professional development (“CPD”) based Beginning his speech in a methodical advice that can only be given by a man of on points. Raphael explained that this manner, Justice Mah reaffirmed Bar his stature: system is envisaged to run on a two-year Council’s relevancy in today’s society cycle giving ample time for each lawyer and stated that it is the young members As leaders, you do not demand to collect their CPD points. Points will be of the Bar that gives the Bar its strength. respect, you command respect and given to each lawyer for activities done Speaking of the Bar of the past, Justice only then people will look up to you as which contribute towards developing Mah drew a comparison with the Bar a leader in the society. professional standards such as writing then and the Bar now. He concluded an article, attending conventions, giving that with 13,000 lawyers today, the Bar
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 35 Events
And two, a wish for the future and perhaps one that is so relevant in these days where liberalisation of the Bar is imminent:
Do not be giants only in the Malaysian Bar, spread your wings and be a giant internationally.
Session 4: Working Conditions — The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Moderator: Lee Shih Speakers : Syahredzan Johan, Wong Fook Meng and Andrew Yeap
Conducted in a manner akin to Oprah Winfrey’s talk show, this session began with Fook Meng observing that many YLs are burnt out after five years of practice. He believes that this is due to a lack of work-life balance that would translate into demotivation, loss of passion and eventually an exodus of many talented YLs into other professions.
As the forum was open to Q&A right from the beginning, one of the first questions raised was what amounted to the “right” salary for first-year lawyers and pupils in chambers. All three speakers asserted that it depends entirely on variables including the nature of the work, the location of the firm and so on. Syahredzan particularly stressed that salaries should commensurate with the amount of work done by a lawyer whilst Fook Meng added that a YL must have the calibre and ability to conduct a case in order to demand for higher wages.
It was queried whether there was a risk in approaching employers for an increment. Syahredzan replied that communication is the key. It will allow an employer to properly assess the employee’s work. So long as one is courteous and professional when addressing their employers, it is difficult to imagine an employer rejecting such a proposal outright. Andrew agreed and implored the YLs to overcome the fear of approaching their employers as it will only suppress a YL’s development.
The speakers nevertheless admitted that there are unreasonable employers. In those circumstances, the speakers assured the delegates that a good YL is in demand everywhere and there is always the choice to move to another firm.
The Convention recognised that in demanding for higher salaries, it is not necessarily true that YLs are “greedy”. Working conditions could also be improved in terms of quality of work such as the opportunity to work on better files. Such “acknowledgement” would ensure that a YL remains motivated and appreciated.
One of the delegates, playing devil’s advocate, suggested that instead of complaining, YLs should reflect in order to determine their own worth. The speakers agreed that a YL must equip themselves with better knowledge and skills in order to justify higher salaries.
36 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
Session 5: Activism and the Bar — No Time or Can’t be campaign. In that dimmed hall with that slideshow appeal, the Bothered? presentation was nothing but inspiring and ended the final session on a high note buzz. Moderator : Vince Chong Speakers : Khaizan Sharizad bt Abdul Razak (Sherrie), Sreekant The Hunt and the Gala Dinner Pillai and Edmund Bon Tai Soon After a long Saturday of sessions, the delegates participated in a The final session of the Convention began with Sherrie and Treasure Hunt codenamed “The Hunt”! Dividing the delegates Sreekant explaining activism — to make a change or reform into 12 groups, The Hunt saw the different teams roaming which is not necessarily politically driven and can encompass around Everly Resort armed with cameras and pen and paper in social and economic reform. In fact, the two speakers agreed a bid to accomplish each task as set out in their “Clue Sheet”. that even joining a Bar Council committee is a form of activism. This included re-enacting scenes from a photograph, solving riddles, looking for a particular object, to name a few. Each task The speakers, upon being prompted, acknowledged that fear is was awarded points at the finish line and the team with the an element that exists in any activism work. However, Sherrie most points won the prize. replied that knowing the objective and cause of her work was sufficient to dissipate any fears. It was at this point that Edmund arrived and he too answered in the following manner:
If you see your programme and your programme is not against the law, then there will be no fear.
This was followed by a short video from the “Walk for Justice” DVD highlighting to the crowd another form of activism. He studied section 42 of the Legal Profession Act 1976 and proudly told the delegates that Parliament gave lawyers the power to act “without fear or favour”. Emphasis was made to the fact that only lawyers are given such powers and therefore, are duty- bound to act in the face of injustice.
The speakers then observed that there was another form of activism in the form of pro bono work. Whilst it may be difficult to find time to engage in pro bono work, the speakers reminded the delegates that time can be found within one’s self and that YLs should always speak to their employer first before engaging in activism.
The Q&A session was particularly engaging with one delegate, Yohendra commenting that activism can manifest itself in different ways and encouraged delegates to start activism with something simple, like twitting or blogging activism-related news.
The session ended with Edmund presenting a slideshow illustrating the many campaigns initiated by Bar Council and other organisations whilst questioning the delegates, in a tone that is distinctively rousing, on the objective of each
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 37 Events
This culminated in the “Gala Dinner: Closing and conclusion The success of the Convention would The Oscars of the Bar”. The highlight not have been possible without the of the dinner is the nomination of the On Sunday, the delegates reassembled in hard work of the amazing and brilliant Constitutional Law Committee, the the main ballroom of the Everly Resort. Organising Committee. A vote of Human Rights Committee and the Legal The purpose was to reflect and approve thanks also goes to the emcees, Malacca Aid Committee for “The Most Colourful the Statement of the Convention. Bar YLC, Dining Team, Hunt team, Committee of the Bar Council Award”. Deemed to be a cornerstone of every photographers, designers, volunteers, Bar Upon an introductory video, each Convention, the Statement is essentially Council Secretariat staff, reporters and committee had to present and introduce a document bearing the wishes, dreams delegates. their committees to the delegates of the and aspirations of the YLs of the Convention. The committee with the Convention. And it all began with “Towards a Better most and loudest cheer was to win the Bar”. award. Naturally, in instances such as After intense debate and redrafting, these, where each committee obtained the Statement was approved by the *Special thanks to Leong Zhi Hong, Yip such enthusiastic applause, the award delegates of the Convention. Richard Xiaoheng, Tiu Gi Gyn, Joanne Leong and was bestowed to all three committees. Wee then submitted and presented Alicia Ng for preparing the web reports The immediate thunderous applause the Statement to the President of the for the Convention, which became the from the delegates was the perfect mark Malaysian Bar, Lim Chee Wee. basis of this report for Praxis. All creative of approval that the delegates believed and literary credit belong to these that all three committees were no doubt The President officially closed the exceptional individuals who prepared the the most colourful committees of Bar Convention, congratulating the NYLC reports on a moment’s notice for NYLC. Council. and all delegates who made it a success.
38 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
Report by the Bar Council Monitoring Team on the Public Rally Held on 9 July 2011 in Kuala Lumpur
A. INTRODUCTION The Malaysian Bar supports and defends the right to assemble peaceably. The right to freedom of assembly and expression is enshrined in article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. This is a fundamental feature of democracy, contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”), which was adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly. Malaya in 1957, and Malaysia in 1963, embraced and accepted the UDHR when it was admitted to the United Nations.
The Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police (headed by Tun Mohd Dzaiddin), which reported in May 2005, recommended to the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong that section 27 of the Police Act 1967 — requiring a permit for a public rally — be abolished. The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (“SUHAKAM”), has made a similar recommendation to the government on several occasions.
After the BERSIH 2.0 coalition, Perkasa and Umno Youth announced that they would organise public rallies on 9 July 2011, Bar Council (“BC”), consistent with its past practice, set up a monitoring team to monitor the main BERSIH 2.0 rally. The objective of the BC monitoring team was to observe whether all parties — including participants and organisers of the rally — exercised the right to freedom of assembly and expression in a peaceful manner, and whether law enforcement officials discharged their duty to uphold and protect the exercise of such right.
About 100 Members of the Bar and pupils in chambers, including the Office Bearers of the Malaysian Bar, volunteered to be part of the monitoring team, which was coordinated by Siti Zabedah Kasim and Seira Sacha Abu Bakar, members of the BC Human Rights Committee (“BCHRC”). The monitors donned chamber attire and wore a “Pemerhati” tag while on duty. They were divided into four teams, headed by two or three team leaders who were BCHRC members with prior monitoring experience.
The outcome of the monitoring exercise demonstrates that people in Malaysia are mature and peace- loving when championing a cause they believe in. The rally participants generally behaved in a peaceful and calm manner; most importantly, we witnessed that people from a wide variety of backgrounds and from across Malaysia participated in the rally without any conflict. This is contrary to the fear of possible racial disharmony or riots, expressed by certain irresponsible public figures.
B. OBSERVATIONS The four teams were placed at four main points in central Kuala Lumpur, namely Masjid Negara, Masjid Jamek, Puduraya bus station and Stadium Merdeka.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 39 Events
B.1. Observations regarding participants
B.1.1. Peaceful rally participants Monitors reported that the participants (save for one incident) behaved in a peaceful and calm manner during the rally. They chanted “Hidup Rakyat”, “Bersih” and “Reformasi”, and sang “Negaraku” and also “Rasa Sayang” on many occasions. The participants stopped marching when they approached police barricades. Their leaders negotiated with the police to allow them through to make their way to Stadium Merdeka. On most occasions, the police did not grant them passage, and ordered them to disperse.
B.1.2. Unruly/irresponsible behaviour by rally participants Two monitors reported having witnessed one or more participants throwing plastic water bottles at a television station reporter who was covering the BERSIH 2.0 rally.
B.2. Observations regarding the police force
B.2.1. Indiscriminate and excessive use of tear gas and water cannons The monitors observed that the police force used tear gas and water cannons arbitrarily, indiscriminately and excessively against the rally participants, including firing tear gas canisters very close to Tung Shin Hospital and employing water cannons while rally organisers were negotiating with the police.
B.2.2. No warnings, or inaudible warnings, given to rally participants Some monitors noted that the police did give warnings prior to utilising tear gas and water cannons. However, it was difficult for the huge crowd to hear what the police commandants said via their loud hailers, except for participants who were situated near the police.
B.2.3. Unnecessary use of physical force/high-handedness by the police force towards the rally participants A number of the monitors observed the police beating, hitting and kicking the rally participants.
B.2.4. Random and arbitrary arrests Many monitors observed the police randomly or arbitrarily arresting rally participants, including those who were dispersing.
B.2.5. Good policing Many monitors also noted that a significant number of police officers were polite towards the leaders of the public rally, the participants and the BC monitoring teams. In particular, the police team stationed at the Jalan Hang Jebat entrance to Stadium Merdeka managed the crowd well, allowing them to assemble just beyond the barricades without unnecessary use of force, and permitting some speeches to be made.
40 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
B.3 Other observations
B.3.1 Business as usual on the day of the rally Some of the monitors who were stationed in the Jalan Petaling area noted that business continued as usual on the day of the rally. As such, the claim that the rally would be harmful for business is unfounded. The rally benefited enterprises that decided to operate on that day, especially with the increased number of patrons.
C. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the observations by the BC monitoring teams, Bar Council makes the following recommendations to the Malaysian Government:
(1) Uphold the constitutional right of Malaysians to assemble without a need for police permits, by amending the Police Act consistent with the recommendations of the SUHAKAM report on Freedom of Assembly issued in 2002;
(2) The police and Federal Reserve Unit to implement international standards as guidelines for their personnel on the use of force and firearms in relation to assembly, consistent with the recommendations of the Report of SUHAKAM Public Inquiry into the incident at KLCC on 28 May 2006; and
(3) A thorough internal investigation by the police into allegations of aggression and undue force, as well as a comprehensive and independent investigation by SUHAKAM, by way of an inquiry on its own motion.
D. APPRECIATION The Malaysian Bar expresses appreciation to the Inspector General of Police (“IGP”), Tan Sri Hj Ismail Omar, for allowing our monitoring teams to observe the public rally and for acknowledging our impartiality in conducting this monitoring exercise. We thank the Polis DiRaja Malaysia for the cooperation rendered to our monitors in carrying out their duties without fear and favour.
Lim Chee Wee President Malaysian Bar
12 July 2011
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 41 Events
Photos by Bar Council Monitoring Team
42 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 43 Events
Meeting with the American Council of Young Political Leaders (19 July 2011)
by Kharmeyni Jumbulingam and photos by Satha Selvan Subramaniam
Bar Council held a meeting with the American Council of Young Political Leaders (“ACYPL”) on 19 July 2011 (Tuesday) at 3:30 pm at the Bar Council Auditorium. Representatives from ACYPL were Jay Chen (President of the Board of Hacienda La Puente Unified School District (California)), the Honorable Alex Cornell du Houx (member of Maine House of Representatives), the Honorable Matt Dollar (member of Georgia House of Representatives), Gwen Langley (Director of State Government Relations Cummins, Inc (Indiana)), the Honorable Dan Lederman (member of South Dakota Senate), Kristie Stiles (Principal and partner of Bedford Grove Consulting (New York)) and Linda Rotunno (Chief Executive Officer of ACYPL (Washington, DC)). Bar Council was represented by Christopher Leong (Vice-President of the Malaysian Bar), Syamsuriatina Ishak (Chairperson of the Bar Council Publications Committee), Richard Wee (Chairperson of the Bar Council National Young Lawyers Committee), HR Dipendra (Chairperson of Bar Council Professional Standards and Development Committee) and Syahredzan Johan (Chairperson of the Bar Council Constitutional Law Committee).
The ACYPL delegates provided an introduction on ACYPL, a bipartisan, non-profit educational exchange organisation dedicated to fostering relations between the next generation of political leaders in the United States and their counterparts around the world through practical educational programmes, including international exchanges, foreign policy and democracy conferences, and election study programmes. The group had just visited Indonesia for a political study tour before their stop in Malaysia. Following that, Christopher Leong explained in brief, an overview of Bar Council.
In the subsequent question-and-answer session, one of the issues discussed was the proposed establishment of the Syariah Bar Council. Christopher Leong informed the attendees that Bar Council is in support of the establishment as it would be in the interest of the public for Syariah practitioners to be regulated.
The Vice-President concluded the hour long meeting with the optimism that even though the Malaysian Bar and Bar Council have many issues to grapple with, such as the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, freedom of expression and various other human rights issues, things will definitely change for the better as long as all relevant parties work together.
44 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Events
Upcoming Events
Organised by Johore Bar Committee Organised by Penang Bar Committee Johore Bench and Bar Games Penang-Perak Bar Games Date: 22 and 23 July 2011 (Friday and Saturday) Date: 22 and 23 July 2011 (Friday and Saturday) Time: 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm (Friday) and 9:00 am to Time: 8:00 am to 10:00 pm (Friday) and 9.00 am Noon (Saturday) to 9:00 pm (Saturday) Venue: Padang Sri Gelam, JB Venue: Penang Contact: Jayabalan s/o Raman Kutty (012-755 2449) Contact: Simon Tan (012-477 7211) Tripartite Games Organised by Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee Date: 16 and 17 Sept 2011 (Friday and Saturday) Conveyancing Practice Committee Hi-Tea Gathering Venue: Penang Date: 22 Sept 2011 (Thursday) Contact: GT Lee (012-393 6464) or Selvi Neelakandan Time: 3:00 pm onwards (04-261 5669) Venue: To be confirmed Contact: Norhayati Rahmad (Yati) (03-2693 3585) Organised by Perak Bar Committee Young Lawyers Committee Charity Night Perak-Penang Bar Games Date: 30 Sept 2011 (Friday) Date: 23 to 25 July 2011 (Saturday to Monday) Time: 7:00 pm onwards Venue: Penang Venue: To be confirmed Contact: Zaizuraimy b Abd Rahim (019-554 1661) Contact: Melissa Dass (03-2693 3585) Organised by Selangor Bar Committee Organised by Negeri Sembilan Bar Committee Selangor Bar Annual Dinner and Dance 2011 Negeri Sembilan Bar Annual Dinner and Dance 2011 Date: 8 Oct 2011 (Saturday) Date: 24 Sept 2011 (Saturday) Time: 7:00 pm onwards Time: 7:30 pm onwards Venue: Holiday Villa Subang, Selangor Venue: Sri Negeri Ballroom, Royale Bintang, Contact: Thinnagaran s/o N Krishnan (03-5519 6219) Seremban, Negeri Sembilan Contact: Hanif Hasan (012-683 2161)
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 45 G-05, Ground Floor, Straits Trading Building No 2 Jalan Lebuh Pasar Besar 50050 Kuala Lumpur Tel: 03-2694 0592
Establised for 20 years, Vincee’s provides tailored and ready-made apparel for the legal profession. +VEHFT3PCFTBOE+BCPUTt#BSSJTUFST3PCFTBOE#JCTt#BSSJTUFST$PBUTBOE4IJSUT Lifestyle
Karen Cheah: What is it about Cupcakes? by Azman Thaiyub Khan and photos by the Editorial Team
Cupcakes. What is it about cupcakes? Karen Cheah, a lawyer practising in the historical and lovely seaside town of Malacca, has the answer. To Karen, it is her way to unwind and relax after a particularly hard week or month of work in her firm, Messrs Fatima Tan & Cheah, which she runs with her partners Fatima Tahir Ali and Fiona Tan. Admittedly she does not bake all that often but when she does, it is a batch of lovely, beautiful, individually-flavoured and distinctly-decorated cupcakes that taste as good as they look.
At her humble home close to the Malacca seaside, Karen spoke to me about her background and professional career whilst a batch of her freshly-baked cupcakes sat proudly on a wire display rack in front of us. Karen has much to be grateful for, her own practice that has been around for 11 years, the opportunity to be involved in many activities organised by the Malacca Bar committee and her lovely daughter, Kyra.
It is with Kyra that Karen does all her baking. In fact, Kyra, who is eight this year, has been baking with Karen since she was about two years of age. Together they have much fun whipping up a batch of cupcake dough and filling the baking trays and, whilst the cupcakes bake away in the oven, preparing the icing. Karen admits that initially it was a messy affair with little Kyra getting flour all over herself and the kitchen, but she has since put it down to individual creative style.
Karen, who has always had a penchant for baking, admits that she gets excited whenever she passes a shop selling baking goods. She loves to look at all the fancy and adorable decorative items that are readily available in all colours, shapes and sizes. Her mind quickly whizzes to all the creative and unique cupcakes that she can create
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 47 Lifestyle
with those decorative items in front of her. Karen, who is also a football fan, proudly decorated several cupcakes with edible icing logos of Manchester United, her favourite English football club, on the day I visited her. In fact, Karen claims that Messrs Fatima Tan & Cheah is a Manchester United firm!
I was curious as to why it was cupcakes that Karen was into baking, and not cakes. Karen was very sure of her answer. Her rationale is this, if she bakes a cake, she gets to decorate one cake, but if she bakes a batch of cupcakes, she has the opportunity to flavour and decorate each one individually. Naturally, since Karen bakes as a form of therapy to unwind and relax, each cupcake that she works on takes a lighter and more fun look by way of decoration.
Karen admits that whilst she bakes about 10 to 20 cupcakes each time, she hardly eats any of them. The benefit of her scrumptious cupcakes is more often enjoyed by Kyra, her partners and her staff at the firm. To her, it is more of the fulfilment that she gets from the whole process and the way it unwinds and relaxes her that draws her to bake. Anyone who gets to taste the cupcakes will quickly agree that Karen’s labour of love not only looks good but tastes amazing.
I had the opportunity to sample some freshly-made cupcakes, with and without decoration, (and also managed to “export” a few back across the state border to Kuala Lumpur) and the taste and flavour that crept along my tongue and subsequently rolled down my throat (and thereon to my waiting ample stomach) was something I had rarely tasted in commercially available cupcakes. I am reliving the moistness and fresh flavouring of the chocolate cupcakes in my mind as I write this piece. There is no doubt about it; Karen obviously has a penchant for baking.
48 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Lifestyle
Karen regrets not being able to bake more often due to her whole process of preparing, baking and decorating cupcakes, busy work schedule and family commitments. Having always Karen finds much needed distraction away from her day-to-day been actively involved in Malacca Bar committee activities, she life and work-related stress. Knowing how to bake and all the has, since 1998, sat in various committees like the National practice she has had with it, Karen was able to bake cupcakes Young Lawyers Subcommittee, Publications Subcommittee, two years in a row for Kyra to take to school for her friends on CLE/Professional Practice & Development Subcommittee and her birthday. Conveyancing Practice Subcommittee. She and her partners have the pride of being the pioneers who initiated the local legal Despite her obvious talent and blessings, Karen has never publication, Re:Lex, a magazine of the Malacca Bar committee dreamt of opening a bakery or even commercialising her way back in 2000, of which she was the editor-in-chief. For the cupcakes. She maintains that she bakes purely for fun and as 2011/12 term, Karen chairs the Court Liaison Subcommittee. a distraction; she calls it “comfort cooking”. Despite numerous compliments and suggestions, Karen never takes orders or Karen, an avid reader of crime novels and autobiographies, charges for her creative output. To her, these cupcakes are finds baking more therapeutic than cooking and finds much merely her temporary outlet and a way to spend some quality comfort in it. In the two to three hours it takes to complete the time with Kyra.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 49 Lifestyle
The Spiritualised Lawyer A Force for Good by Anita Sharma and photos by Kamaruddin Jamin
We are lawyers. Which can be quite nice. But these days, all If we could but just conquer fear. Fear of losing. Fear of loss. of us are under so much stress and strain. So many deadlines Fear of forgetting something important. Fear of what may be to meet. Often with overly demanding clients. And those of us coming at us from just around the corner. who have bosses have to contend with them. The more high powered we are as lawyers, the more stress we have. We need to strive for mental equipoise. Can you imagine it if our mind is always calm? Unwavering. So that we do not feel Our mind is rarely calm. Rarely silent. We wake up in the dead insecure. So that we can live our life, albeit as lawyers, with a of the night, with trepidation and fear, perhaps remembering keen sense of self assurance. Without anxiety or desperation. something that we ought to have done, or some problems we are anticipating. In this materialistic world, it is easy to get caught in the daily grind and toil. Most of our pain and suffering is because we are I dare say a number of us can hardly fall asleep easily, unless we body conscious. Whatever fear or anxiety we have is because of are so utterly exhausted by the long hours of the work day. Our our expectations that we have to always be on top of things. family life is suffering and we have coping habits which are not healthy. I don’t advocate too much dependence on God. He has given us all that we need. To do marvellous things with ourselves We have conflicts of interest. And we often have to put out and our lives. But if we expect miracles to be wrought specially fires. With difficult judges and opponents who could not care for us by some divine power, I tend to think that we have a less if we lose our licence to practise law. They capitalise on long wait coming. Yet I do advocate that we develop a strong our small mistakes without any concern that we could lose our spirituality. livelihood.
50 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Lifestyle
potentially difficult situations but we confidently marshal and use our personal powers to do the right thing, with our minds resolutely focused on us being unafraid and untouched by fear; the fear of anything. This is the Lawyers’ Creed.
Being spiritualised means that we vanquish once and for all our body conscious fears.
We are prudent but we do not fear failure. We are bold and we stand up, ready for the fight. We do not give in to petty faint heartedness. We do not vacillate but we act boldly, knowing that the mighty forces of the universe rally around us when we are fearless.
We do not feel like mere cogs but we fill our minds and hearts with the spirit of courage. We understand that we are eternal. And that death is a mere trifle and not to be feared. Because we are spiritually empowered, we truly understand what life is all about and we intuitively know how to live it.
Do you see what I mean? As long as we are caught up with the petty aspects of human life, and its consequent possible pitfalls, we will not be able to see the big picture. We will not be able to act with valour and the smallest things will cause us to tremble.
A spiritualised lawyer has little capacity to feel afraid and nervous. We have sense of our strength and purpose. We have well-placed confidence that whatever happens we can handle it. Having this spiritual confidence is the precursor to greatness. And do not all of us want to be great? Instead of just being lawyers reduced to meekness and timidity by a mere situation or person who is trying to stand in the way of us doing our job; which is to make certain that our clients are protected, that they get the justice due to them and that our lives are full of beautiful experiences and love.
The keen sense that we are not just this body. That we are not here just to make money and pay bills. That we are not here just to toil from one day to the next with tremulousness and sometimes, a barely-nuanced hustler attitude.
We are lawyers. We are not hustlers. We are not out to make a quick buck and therefore sacrifice our principles. When we are spiritualised, it is much easier to get in touch with our core values. To be spiritually uplifted is the most beautiful high imaginable. When we are able to tie up our aspirations and dreams with our goals to unite our soul with the Cosmic soul. This world is not meant to be based on materialism. Actually all of us know this. But the thing which eludes us is how to be blissful — even in the midst of all the hustle and bustle of busy legal practice. With all its pitfalls. And danger of fall downs.
May I suggest that we, henceforth, see ourselves as forces of divinity. We do not leave too many things to chance but we are not troubled by the unknown factors.
We are no longer conscious of our limitations but instead we sense our absolute powerfulness. We are not intimidated by
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 51 Lifestyle
Aria@Damansara A Lawyers’ (Non-Foodie) Review Article and photos by the Editorial Team
44G&M, Plaza Damansara, Jalan Medan Setia 2, Bukit Damansara, 59100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: 03-2095-0016, www.aria.my, Facebook.com/ariaitalian
“Aria”, Italian for “air”, has a melodious meaning attached to it where it has been used to refer to sonnets and signified a manner or style of singing or playing. Similarly, anyone who walks into Aria@Damansara will definitely feel some stirrings when looking at the cozy and demure interior of this restaurant, formerly known as “Moxie”. Nestled amongst some bakeries and pubs, Aria looks coolly inviting with its interior of dark sombre red walls and adjusted lighting. Surely anyone who walks by Aria after a hard day’s work would give it a second look and find the invitation of the cozy ambiance too much to resist.
The Praxis Editorial Team had the pleasure of being invited to be part of the Aria experience, where we made the acquaintance of Peter Yew (General Manager), Fadlin Johan (Manager) and the bubbly head chef, Chef Izwan, who insisted to be known only by his first name. The three took great lengths to impart on us the concept of what Aria is, all the while plying us with their sumptuous meals.
Peter explained that Aria has been modelled to give an Italian semi-fine dining feel which would differentiate it from the themes of its sister restaurants; Opus, Cava, Leonardo’s and FourSeas, all located along Jalan Bangkung at Bangsar.
Anyone crossing Aria’s threshold for the first time will not miss the impressive collection of single malt whiskies proudly displayed behind a glass enclosure, enhanced by its impressive lighting. Aria boasts a collection of 70 varieties of single malt whiskies to cater to the tastebuds of any liquor aficionado.
Besides those who come in for a drink or two to unwind, Aria also sees a clientele of diners who come to experience a gastronomic adventure from the large number of Italian dishes available on the menu, whipped up by Chef Izwan and his team.
Whilst explanations were being put forth, Aria’s management provided us with an opportunity to savour a number of their signature dishes specially selected by Fadlin.
52 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Lifestyle
• For starters, we had the Antipasto Platter, which is a combination of hot and cold starters of beef carpaccio, salmon carpaccio, arancini, baked portobello, mixed grilled vegetables, arthichoke, calamari and zucchini fritti; • Mixed Mushroom Surprise, which was a mouthwatering delight; • Hawaiian Beef Pepperoni Pizzeta, baked using a special concoction of flours by Chef Izwan, having spent some four years in Italy mastering the art of pizza making; • Beef Scaloppine alla Romagna, a beef-lover’s paradise; • Roasted Cod Chardonnay, bearing succulent pieces of cod atop a plate of roasted vegetables; and • Our personal favourite, Linguine Aglio Olio Smoked Duck, a scrumptious pasta.
Take our word for it — they all tasted excellent!
And just when we thought we were about to burst from the seams, leaning back with a sigh of pleasure, there came a fresh “assault” to our senses from Chef Izwan with dessert in the form of Arancione Chocolate Mousse and Blueberry Tiramisu, which didn’t stay long enough on the table to be scrutinised and described.
For the record, let it just be said that it was sinful enough to be mentioned to your spouse and subsequently frowned upon by your doctor!
What was more, considering the helpings served, we noted that the meals were all easy on the budget.
Peter mentioned that proprietorship of Aria as well as its sister restaurants was actually held by some lawyers through shareholding in an investing company — more proof that lawyers have more talents than we can contain!
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 53 Ads Lifestyle
Naturally, the cozy and private Aria becomes a meet-up place that lawyers and non- lawyers alike who wish to unwind after a hard day’s work or to entertain clients. In addition, Aria also receives much business from the neighbouring residential areas and offices.
As a lunchtime crowd puller, Aria recently introduced a noon to 3:00 pm all-you-can-eat salad bar buffet accompanied by soup of the day for only RM9.90, a promotion which has received rave reviews and is extremely popular, especially with the ladies.
Aria takes much pride in the preparation of its menu under the careful and watchful eye of Italian-trained Chef Izwan. All their pasta and bread are made inhouse and under strict quality control. The six-man kitchen and five-man floor team’s diligence definitely pays off when customers often pay them compliments on their food, drinks and decor.
Manager, Fadlin told the team that the menu is updated every four to five months to give it a fresh feel and it is currently on its second review. Due to the demand for their steak dishes, there are now more varieties of steak available on their menu. Patrons can now enjoy meals such as the Grilled 80 days Grain-Fed Angus Prime Rib, Grilled 80 days Grain-Fed Angus Rib Eye Au Poivre, all-traditional Moxie Man Barbequed Short Ribs — a plateful of braised beef short ribs in barbeque sauce, and Medagloine Rustico — a grilled 80 days grain-fed tenderloin on a bed of rustic bread in creamy porcini sauce served with sautéed mushroom and potato. For those not into steak, there are also meals like Brasato di Agnello — a braised lamb shank dish, Pan Roasted Honey Glazed Duck Breast, Grilled Spring Chicken and Seared Tuna Steak. A range of homemade pasta dishes such as Fettucine ala’ Aria, Spaghetti Vongole, Fettucine Gamberi e Pesto and Linguini Tonno e Pomodoro Presca are available to satisfy any connoisseur of pasta looking for a fix. Also found on the menu are salad dishes such as Insalata di Aria — a salad of garden lettuce, tomatoes, cherry tomatoes, button mushrooms, black olives and quail eggs topped with parmesan flake and Italian salad dressing, Insalata di Avocado, Insalata Caprese and of course the Classic Caesar salad.
Aria maintains very reasonable prices for large-portion dishes and enjoys annexed parking facilities from neighbouring Plaza Damansara. The restaurant entertains guests during its happy hours from 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm, and the restaurant starts accepting dinner crowds from 6:00 pm onwards.
To Praxis readers — we say — Buon appetito!
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 55 Lifestyle
Run Your Practice the Smart Way
by Rudi Cheu, Managing Consultant, Denning IT Sdn Bhd
Approximately 5% to 10% of Malaysian law The Denning System workflow is relatively KIV/File Progress Tracking Alerts — firms currently employ some form of Law simple and straightforward — new legal minimises your exposure to negligence risk Practice and Management Software — this clerks and pupils will find it a breeze. First, and facilitates the monitoring of individual figure is in stark contrast to developed nations client, property and matter information is staff/file progress. like the United States and England, where the entered into the system. Following that, the majority of law firms run on fully computerised Denning System merges the aforementioned Auto Client Accounting — organises your systems. Such systems fill the gap that is left information into templates to auto-draft a accounts into Client, Disbursement and Office open by the arguably incomplete educational myriad of legal documents, ranging from Advance accounts. Account Monitoring tells circle that law graduates go through — letters, forms, agreements to even bank you the amount of fees to be transferred, the first, the LLB, followed by either foreign loan documents. Staff will utilise the KIV amount of service tax payable, your firm’s Bar examinations or the local Certificate in functions to record completed tasks and trial balance and many other accounting Legal Practice (“CLP”), which fails to equip be reminded of pending/overdue matters, statistics. lawyers with the business management and and finally the bills, receipts and payment practice skills needed to effectively function vouchers are generated automatically by Billing/Receipts/Vouchers — makes in, as well as manage, a successful practice. the system. issuing bills, receipts and vouchers a one- click operation via preset Billing Codes. This, coupled with other factors such as an alarmingly high industry rate of staff turnover Reporting/Analysis — generates detailed as well as rapidly increasing competition reports on staff performance, fees growth, from mushrooming legal firms make law top 100 customers, billing status (unbilled practice and management systems a highly files, outstanding bills, etc), service tax reports, attractive, if not essential, solution for today’s and much more. legal professionals. HR/Office Management — organised The Denning Law Office Suite, widely Customer Relations Management (“CRM”), touted as “Malaysia’s Best Law Practice, Human Resources, Office Management and Management & Accounting System”, more. is currently making waves as the most cost-effective (no maintenance fees), comprehensive and user-friendly solution available for SME Malaysian legal practitioners.
Initially designed for inhouse use, the Denning Law Office Suite is currently in its third generation and is the product of nearly a decade of development and innovation between a team of Malaysian legal and IT Through its range of features, the system professionals. The system is represented as an allows you the benefit of: “all-encompassing” practice, management From actual hands-on experience with the A Fully Digital Database/File Folder and accounting solution which contains all Denning System, I would say that the Denning Management — all client, property, matter the features necessary to run an efficient Law Practice, Management & Accounting information can be referenced without having legal practice. System is in prime position to solve many, to leave your chair. File Folder Management if not all of the major problems faced by organises each and every document into SME legal practitioners today. Why settle specific folders for instant access. for the old and inefficient ways of running a practice — when superior quality and speed Automatic Document Drafting — of work, reduced dependency on staff, lower information in your digital database is overhead and better overall control of one’s automatically merged with templates to firm are all benefits that you can enjoy with produce finished legal documents ready the Denning Law Office Suite. for printing at the click of a mouse button.
56 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011
Reach Out To The Right Audience
Praxis, the official publication of Bar Council Malaysia, is published quarterly in collaboration with LexisNexis Malaysia Sdn Bhd. The publication is circulated to approximately 14,000 readers, which consist of 13,600 Members of the Malaysian Bar (advocates and solicitors holding valid Practising Certificates and operating their business in Peninsular Malaysia).
Out of this total, 63% advocates and solicitors are located in KL and Selangor, and there are approximately 5,600 legal firms throughout Peninsular Malaysia.
With its proven record of highly consistent circulation and elite readership, Praxis offers unique marketing opportunities for advertisers and sponsors.
For advertising enquiries:
E-mail or call to: [email protected] (603) 7882-3534 / 019 392-6951 (Hasnizam Mohamad) [email protected] (603) 2050 2037 / 012 205-0353 (Nishta Jiwa) Sports
Malaysia/Singapore Bench and Bar Games 2011 (29 Apr to 1 May 2011) by Jaspal Singh Gill, with assistance from web reporters: HR Dipendra, Farez Jinnah, Seira Sacha Abu Bakar, Noor Arianti Osman, Richard Wee and Peter Douglas Ling, and photos by BC Web Reporters, Editor, Law Society of Singapore and Andrew Khoo
The Malaysia/Singapore Bench and Bar Games 2011 were held in Singapore from 29 Apr to 1 May 2011.
Team Malaysia had been undefeated since 2006. The Games in Penang last year turned out to be one of the closest in recent memory, and we eventually triumphed by the narrowest of margins 7½ to 6½. Hence the stage was set for another intense battle this year, and we arrived in Singapore with a certain level of wariness as one would expect when encroaching on enemy territory.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 59 Sports
Day One (29 Apr 2011)
Golf, traditionally held on the final day of the Games, was brought forward to the first day of competition due to the high cost involved in playing on the weekend. The Malaysian team was 50 strong, headed by the evergreen convener K Puspalingam, who was facing his old nemesis, the charming but tough Lim Siew Kuan. Team Malaysia managed to secure the services of YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria, the Chief Judge of Malaya, as well as Federal Court judges, YA Tan Sri James Foong and YA Dato’ Seri Md Raus b Sharif.
Each team was divided into 25 pairs and the format of play was match play. Played at the scenic but demanding Keppel Golf Club, both teams were locked in an intense battle from the start, and until the last pair came in, no one had an idea who the winner was until it was officially announced that we had won by the closest of margins 13-12, thereby giving us a morale-boosting first point of the Games.
To cap of a wonderful performance, Team Malaysia pair of Dalgit Singh and Judicial Commissioner, Tuan Harminder Singh emerged as the Best Overall Pair while the top three Malaysian pairs were:
1st placing TK Sunther and S Mahender 2nd placing Anuar Hafiz and Arief Lokman 3rd placing Jaspal Singh Gill and Sunil Abraham
60 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Sports
While the golfers were doing battle, by Anand Ponnudurai, played their After the break, the Singaporean team hockey was played at the grass pitch hearts out in front of the Chief Justices increased the pressure. Despite almost of the Singapore Cricket Club. Despite of Malaysia and Singapore as well as Lim every contentious decision going the way being promised an international-sized Chee Wee, President of the Malaysian of the Singaporean team, the courageous hockey pitch, the game was played on Bar. Malaysian team held on bravely and did a smaller pitch that is often associated not give the Singaporeans the chance with six-a-side games. The opening game The game started furiously with both to score, and held on to win 1-0 to give shocking defeat two years ago was still sides keen on scoring the important Malaysia the second point of the Games. fresh on the mind of the Malaysian Bar first goal, and both teams were evenly hockey team, and this was therefore a matched. It looked set to go into half The opening reception was held at the must-win sport for Malaysian pride. time scoreless when, following a penalty Singapore Cricket Club and among the corner, a Singaporean player was notable attendees were the Chief Justice This time around, the Malaysian team adjudged to have used his body to block of Malaysia, YAA Tun Dato’ Seri Zaki b showed up with a better and stronger a goal bound short. A penalty flick was Tun Azmi and his Singapore counterpart, team. A couple of key players returned awarded, and under intense pressure Justice Chan Sek Keong. The Malaysia and the team looked poised and from the watching Chief Justices, Vijayraj contingent was in a boisterous mood as confident. Despite the team being not coolly flicked the penalty in to give the we held a crucial two-point lead going so youthful, the Malaysian team, led by Malaysian team a 1-0 lead going into into the 2nd day of competition. convener Amrit Pal Singh and captained half-time.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 61 Sports
led by convener Deepa were scheduled to be played: four men’s Nambiar and captained doubles, one veteran’s doubles, one by Wong Keat Ching, ladies doubles and one mixed doubles. controlled the tempo The Malaysian team halved the men’s with a steady and doubles at 2-2 while the pair of Andrew deliberate play while Khoo and Souren Norendra easily won Jenine Gill was in her the veteran’s doubles. Unfortunately, element, towering Singapore triumphed in the ladies and over the Singaporean mixed doubles and we narrowly lost 3-4. defence and shooting pointpo after point. Team Malaysia now had a narrow 2½ to However,Ho the 1½ lead in the overall score. Singaporeans,S playingpl a faster Meanwhile badminton and table tennis anda more robust were being played at Bishan Sports game,g engaged the Hall. Badminton had traditionally been MalaysiansM with a the strongest sport for Team Malaysia, physicalp and robust who had not been defeated in recent styles of play and memory. However, a number of key werew not afraid players including convener AI Nathan to hustle in an could not make the trip due to injuries, attempt to throw and a close game was expected. The our girls off their Malaysian team had recruited a couple of rhythm. promising young lady lawyers. Together with veterans Francis Ng, K Mohan and GoingG i into i t the th final fi l quarter, the Malaysia the evergreen pair of Lau How Chong Day Two (30 Apr 2011) team held a three-point lead but the and Kelvin Kong, expectations were high Singaporeans came back strongly and that we could pull off a victory. Day two of competition saw a total of with the partisan crowd strongly behind eight sports scheduled to be played. them, managed to claw back the deficit Five ties were played: three men’s To dilute Team Malaysian’s support, and drew level. The Malaysian had a doubles, one mixed doubles and one Singapore had arranged for all the sports last shot at goal and actually scored the ladies doubles. All games were close- to be played at various venues all over winning point, but it was ruled invalid fought encounters, some even going the country. Unperturbed, Lim Chee Wee and the score was 19-19 when the final to the wire, and after all games were chartered a van to ferry the Chief Justice whistle was blown. completed, we whitewashed the and the supporters from one venue to Singaporeans 5-0. another, though much of the entire A vital point was halved, and the overall day was spent looking out of the van’s score was 2½ to ½ in our favour. Meanwhile the table tennis team, led by window. Wallace Wong, was doing battle with The next venue was aatt The first venue was Jurong West Sports Keppel Club, where a Hall, where netball was played. This was hard-fought battle in a sport which promised plenty of action tennis was going on.n. and long-legged beauties, and it was The Malaysian teamm therefore no surprise to see the Chief had prepared wellll Justice, Lim Chee Wee and Christopher for these Games, butt Leong (Vice-President of the Malaysian convener Yeoh Choo Bar) among the supporters. Other Keong was takingg notable fans were Council members, things cautiously ass Andrew Khoo and Jaspal Singh Gill, as the Singaporeans well as Anand Ponnudurai, the de facto were capable of netball team mascot. A crucial point was pulling all the plugs expected here, as our netball girls had in the hope of proven far superior to their Singapore securing a win on counterparts in previous editions of the home soil after their Games. defeat two years ago. The game was hard fought from the first whistle and as the game wore on, As in previous it was evident we were witnessing two years, seven ties distinct styles of play. The Malaysians,
62 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Sports
their Singaporean counterparts. This had Mohan Kang had been having regular Singapore convener, with a convincing traditionally been a strong sport for the training sessions and practice matches, 3-0 win in the ladies tie. Veteran Singaporeans, and despite our team’s and had recruited veterans such as Rajendran Navaratnam, back in the squad valiant effort to turn the tables and beat Stanley Sinnapen and Wan Nadhri as well after a seven-year hiatus and playing them, we eventually succumbed to a 1-4 as young guns, GT Lee and Ai Li, from at No 4, lost 0-3 to a much younger defeat. Penang into the team. and fitter opponent before Khaik Kew, playing a sterling role as captain at No 3, A long journey was then made to Seletar Before our players could get into their levelled the score with a hard-fought 3-1 Country Club in north Singapore where usual stride, the first game was over and win. bowling was being played. This was we easily lost 3-25. Things improved another sport which we were traditionally slightly in the second set and we lost It was down to the final game, Jason very strong, having won without losing 12-25. With nothing to lose and staring Lee of Malaysia against Singapore’s top a single game during last year’s Games at imminent defeat, our players pulled player, Kok Wye. As pressure rose over in Penang. Convener Rodzim Zaimy, up their socks and fought tooth and the course of the game, Kok Wye injured together with Jeyakumar, Alvin Loo, Alvin nail until the very end. Alas, a couple of his calf muscle and could not carry on. Neo and the rest of the bowlers, looking crucial points went in Singapore’s way Although the Malaysian team could have like avid Liverpool fans in their striking and we eventually lost 24-26. claimed a walkover, they did not do so. red Adidas T-shirts, were in a buoyant Showing exemplary sportsmanship, Khaik mood and spirits were high. Though the Singapore had now closed the deficit and Kew allowed a replacement when most game started in the morning, it ended our lead was only one point going in to would have demanded a walkover. The well into the afternoon and by the time the last competitive game for the day, vastly-experienced Woon Kwong stepped the final pin dropped, we had won with a squash. in once more and in a fiercely-contested convincing 11-2 score line. decider, Jason defeated him by 3-2, Not much was expected from squash as thus delivering victory to us. Malaysia After the morning session of games, our top players could not make the trip won 3-2 and clinched squash and more we had won two, lost two and halved due to various reasons, while another importantly, we won by exhibiting great netball, and the overall score stood at 4½ player had pulled out at the very last sportsmanship and fair play. to 2½ in our favour. moment. Singapore had won this event the past two years, and another defeat Two non-competitive games were played Three sports were scheduled to be played was staring us in the face. Peh Khaik that night, pool at GF Billiards in Depo in the afternoon session; volleyball, Kew, who was captaining the team in Heights Shopping Centre and darts at squash and veterans soccer. However, place of convener Edward Saw, was NUSS Bukit Timah. Convener Anand veterans football was called off as a left scratching his head on how to Ponnudurai led the way by winning both rally, in conjunction with the Singapore field a lineup capable of taking on the his ties, but unfortunately the rest of Elections, was due to take place at Toa Singaporeans. the team could not deliver the vital final Payoh Stadium, the venue of the soccer point and we lost 4-3. The darts team, game. First up was Derek Chong, a new player captained by S Ravichandran, won 4-1. for the Malaysian team at No 2. Despite Volleyball was the first sport up at Jurong his best efforts, he lost to his vastly Thus the overall score was still a West Sports Hall, a sport we had not won superior opponent Woon Kwong 0-3. precocious two-point lead of 5½ to 3½ ever since it was made competitive two However, Lesley Lim who was making her after a total of nine competitive games years ago. Conveners Cheow Wee and debut in the games beat Hazel Tang, the going in to the third and final day of competition.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 63 Sports
Day Three (1 May 2011)
Day three of competition started early for the cross country team as they waited for the bus ride to MacRitchie Reservoir. The Malaysian team had a number of young women runners making their debut in the Games. All were eager to run as hard as they could for Ganesarajah who had announced that he would be retiring as convener at the end of the Games.
However, despite some impressive performances by our young women runners, the rest of the team could not keep up with the extremely fit and conditioned Singaporeans and we lost rather tamely. A silver lining in the cloud emerged when Ganesarajah agreed to stay on as convener for another term.
Next up was veterans’ soccer and this was a crucial game, not merely because of pride, but due to the need to keep Malaysia in a commanding position. On a cold, drizzly morning at SCC Dempsey Road field, 14 Malaysian veterans took on their Singaporean counterparts in the hope of securing another point for Malaysia. They may have been classified goalkeeper Collin Swee pulled off 223 for the loss of six wickets in their 40 as “veterans”, but make no mistake; some good saves. The final whistle was overs. Captain See Kwong Yan and his men greeted with much joy and excitement as were all young at heart and played with Malaysia held on for a 3-2 win. It was a daunting task for the Malaysians, vim, vigour and determination! as we needed to score 224 runs to win. The overall score was now 6½ to 4½ We started off well, but lost a number The game was mired with mistimed in our favour going into the last three of key wickets until it came to our last tackles, fouls and loss of temper among games, cricket, ladies football and two batsmen. Batting under immense players. It did not help that the referee premier football. pressure, they steadily kept going until blew questionable decisions. Players the final over but in the end it proved soon fell for theatrics rather than skills. Cricket started as scheduled at Singapore to be a bridge too far and we were all However, it was Malaysia who opened Cricket Club. Prior to commencing the out for 206 runs when the last ball was the scoring and doubled our lead for a game, both cricket teams observed a bowled. deserved 2-0 lead at halftime. minute of silence in memory of Cheah Wei Lin, a member of the Malaysian Singapore had now closed the gap to Singapore came back strongly in the Bar who passed away on 9 May 2010. one point heading in to the last two second half, and reduced the score to He had been an integral part of the soccer games at SAFRA Tampines Club. 2-1. The Malaysians rallied strongly. organising committee for the Malaysia/ Packing their midfield and tackling every Singapore Bench and Bar Games 2010, Much was expected from ladies soccer as ball, they soon marshalled forward. A and had also served as the Penang cricket we had drawn 1-1 with Singapore in last free kick just outside the penalty box was convener. year’s games, and Federal Court Judge, awarded, and Ganesh Perumal delivered YA Tan Sri James Foong and Lim Chee an exquisite right bender and curled the Malaysia won the toss but elected to Wee were among the notable supporters. ball into the top right hand corner of the field first, as convener Mark Tallala and However, Singapore quickly took the lead Singapore goal for a 3-1 lead. Singapore Captain Muralee Nair felt that the cold in the first five minutes and by half-time, managed to pull one goal back and it and damp conditions would make it they were 4-0 up. The Malaysians put was nervous final minutes for Captain difficult for the Singaporeans to hold up a better show in the second half but See and the Malaysian supporters. onto their slippery bats. Alas it was not Singapore still managed to score another Thankfully our defence held firm and to be, as the Singaporeans romped to three goals and we succumbed to a 7-0
64 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Sports
hammering. Despite all that, convener Ng that descended on all his players as they May Yeung and her footballers deserved went through their pre-match rituals. all the applause that followed after the Unfortunately as the first half progressed, game as they never stopped running and the Malaysians were getting more and trying until the final whistle. more frustrated as Singapore had parked the team bus in front of their goal, and Despite Team Malaysia having held the we could not find an opening. The first lead for almost the entire duration of the half ended scoreless. Games, Singapore had now pulled level at 6½ all, and were now smelling blood The half-time break saw a bruising team as well as the coveted Judge’s Cup. talk by team manager, Isa Aziz Ibrahim to the players. It must have worked, as what It was déjà vu all over again, as last followed in the second half were shorter year in Penang also saw premier soccer and crisper passes and better finishing being the all-important game to decide which led to the first goal being scored in the ultimate winner of the Games. The our favour. Although Singapore managed stage was set, the cards were laid on the to equalise, we scored two more and table, and the sports captains for both the final goal was simply divine, an contingents, Jaspal Singh Gill and Joseph unexpected chip from the corner that Liow, were on the field, praying hard for blindsided everyone. that crucial final point. The Singaporean, staring at imminent Amidst all the tension, convener Yap defeat, increased their hardnosed style Yeow Han appeared calm and collected, of play and constantly challenged all and exhibited an air of quiet confidence decision made by the referee that went against them. This did not deter them, and in an off-the-ball incident, the game turned explosive with an altercation that threatened to spill over to the substitute bench and the spectators. Thankfully, the managers of the respective teams were able to calm the situation down but a Malaysian player was sent off in the process. Fortunately, the Malaysians, now one player down, were able to hold their own for the dying minutes of the game for a wonderful and convincing 3-1 win!
Joyous celebrations permeated the Malaysian camp as soon as the final whistle was blown as we had won the Judge’s Cup by the narrowest of margins again, 7½ to 6½ !
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 65 Sports
TheT closing ceremony was enlivened by the witty Chelvarajah ofo the Law Society of Singapore who, since time immemorial, hash been tasked with reading out the final scores at the closing dinner.d Guests were also treated to a special performance by tthree members of the netball team, namely Deepa Nambiar, RuthR Maran and Syarizah Razman. Although there were non black fishnet stockings and saucy attire this time round, everyonee thoroughly enjoyed themselves.
TThe stage was also set for the boat race. Ever so gracious in ddefeat, the Malaysian team took their time to finish drinking theirt five mugs of beer. Timing it ever so well, the Malaysian teamt allowed the Singaporean team to emerge the victor by 0.020 seconds. It demanded a photo-finish but the eagle-eyed ChiefC Justice of Singapore and YA Tan Sri James Foong, ruled rightlyr in favour of the Singaporeans.
YYA Tan Sir James Foong then proudly received the Judge’s CCup from the Chief Justice of Singapore and hoisted it above hish head to the thunderous applause of the Malaysians and the politep clapping of the Singaporeans!
AcknowledgmentA
TheT Bar Council Sports Committee would like to thank the ChiefC Justice, YAA Tun Dato’ Seri Zaki b Tun Azmi for heading thet Malaysian delegation and taking the time to witness all the games, the President of the Malaysian Bar, Lim Chee Wee and all Council members, fellow lawyers and supporters who were present during the Games who cheered us on in the face of adversity. It was a combined effort of all parties that helped us bring home the Judge’s Cup.
66 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011
State Bar News
State Bar News (March–May 2011)
Contributions by State Bar Secretariats and committee members in other states (eg Selangor and Wilayah Persekutuan). About 40 Members of the Bar, SyarieS practitioners and pupils in chambers participated in the programme.
On 19 May 2011, the second of the series of the talks and discussions, entitled “Pengesahan Lafaz Cerai” was held at the same venue. Moderated by Fahmi Osman, the discussion wasw related to lafaz sarih and kinayah that need to be verified in court, the correct pleadings to be filed in court, the main elements to be proved at trial and submissions on the related court orders sought. The second talk wasw attended by about 35 participants and the programme saw a very active question- and-answer session.
TheT Kedah/Perlis Syariah Law Committee Johore Bar Committee Aid Centre was honoured to be given a booth plans to continue with the series on every to inform the public of legal aid services and second Thursday of the month, which is set A high tea with Muar High Court Judges and entertained a large crowd. to resume in July 2011. Judicial Commissioner was held on 1 Apr 2011 which was organised by the Social, Charity On 2 Apr 2011, a Kedah/Perlis Bar Committee Management meetings/Discussions/Courtesy and Welfare Subcommittee. A welcoming (“KPBC”) Gotong-Royong was held. From calls by the KPBC to the various law- high tea in honour of YA Dato Abd Halim b 8:30 am to 3:00 pm, the Kedah/Perlis Bar’s enforcement agents and courts, inter alia: Aman at Johor Bahru, also organised by the newly-elected committees cancelled all their (1) 7 Mar 2011: Courtesy call to the State Social, Charity and Welfare Subcommittee family plans over the weekend and spent Legal Adviser’s Office; was held on 7 Apr 2011. the Saturday cleaning up, reorganising and (2) 20 Apr 2011: Mesyuarat Pengurusan rearranging books and files in the KPBC with Kangar High Court; A seminar on stamp duty was held on 20 Building. The mini auditorium on the second (3) 12 May 2011: MSSP courtesy call at Apr 2011. The following month on 27 May floor of the Bar building was rearranged and 2:30 pm; and 2011, a seminar on law of wills was held. given a new “look” courtesy of this exercise, (4) 29 May 2011: Management meeting in the interest of freeing up more space and with Kedah Judges at 4:00 pm. An elevation dinner to honour YA Datuk maximising its use. The Chairperson of the Hue Siew Kheng was held on 22 June 2011. Kedah/Perlis Bar was very much indebted to KPBC had a short course on “Applied and appreciated the committee and staff Mediation” which is to be held in the Kedah The Johore Bar Bowling Tournament is members who had given up their valuable Syariah Courts Complex, Anak Bukit, Alor scheduled to be held on 2 July 2011 at time on a Saturday. Setar with an estimated 70 participants. Danga Bowl, Danga City Mall, Johor Bahru, The Kedah/Perlis Bar is both pleased and whereas the Johore Bar-Bench Games is On 21 Apr 2011, the first of the continuing privileged that the Honourable Senior Retired scheduled to be held on 22 and 23 July 2011. legal education series of talks and discussion, Judge Gordon Low had kindly agreed to be entitled “Perceraian Secara Persetujuan its trainer. The Kedah/Perlis Bar is made to A Professional Standards Course is scheduled Bersama” was held at the KPBC Building. understand that Judge Low is in Malaysia to be held on 26 and 27 July 2011. The moderator was Siti Razasah bt Abd at the invitation of the Palace of Justice, Razak, Chairperson of the Kedah/Perlis Bar Malaysia to conduct a training for members Kedah/Perlis Bar Committee Syariah Law Committee. The event covered of the Malaysian Judiciary over a period of six topics such as filing procedure, preparation months. In this respect, the Kedah/Perlis Bar On 13 Mar 2011, the Kedah/Perlis Bar was for submissions, consent agreement, draft is also thankful that the Malaysian Judiciary invited to participate in this event organised order, related orders in a divorce proceeding, and the Offices of the Chief Registrar, Chief by the Kedah State Government, which is a jurisdiction of the Syariah Court, current Judge of Malaya, Chief Justice and Judicial bi-annual event. The weeklong event drew practices of the Syariah Courts in Kedah and Appointments Commission have aided the large crowds and the Kedah/Perlis Bar Legal a comparison of practices in Syariah Courts Committee in making the arrangements for
68 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 State Bar News
the short course that enabled the programme at Sutra Beach Resort & Spa, Kampung Rhu held at the KL Bar Auditorium. The meeting to be scheduled smoothly. KPBC hopes Tapai, Merang, Terengganu on 15 and 16 attracted approximately 70 very excited, that the event will bring much benefit to July 2011. enthusiastic and energetic young lawyers, its members, mediation being hitherto an including one who was only in her sixth uncanvassed topic amongst the Bar, yet full Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee day of pupillage! of advantages for members and their clients. On 11 Mar 2011, a Professional Development On 21 Mar 2011, a PDC seminar on “The Kelantan Bar Committee Committee (“PDC”) seminar on “Islamic Advocates Journey — From First Steps to Wills II” was held. The seminar, the second Greatness” was held. The seminar was Most of Kelantan Bar Committee’s of a three-part series of seminars on Islamic presented by Hugh Selby, a professional programmes for April to June 2011 were on wills, featured Amir Bahari. The seminar was advocacy trainer attached to the Australian continuing legal education. The Kelantan Bar held at the KL Bar Auditorium at 3:00 pm National University College of Law. The seminar Continuing Legal Education Subcommittee and was attended by 58 participants. The was held at the KL Bar Auditorium at 6:30 (“CLE”) organised many programmes for the presentation covered the key differences pm and was attended by 133 participants. sake of knowledge for members, especially between Islamic and conventional estate The speaker went through seven discussion for the young lawyers and pupils in chambers. planning, appointment of executors, how to points that addressed the aspects of control, qualify clients effectively, effectively billing, which were “Maintaining the Illusion of First of all, CLE organised a talk on “Basic strategic planning with trustee corporations, Confidence”, “One Adaptable Case Map of Criminal Procedure” on 26 Apr 2011 and the role of lawyers in estate planning. from First Fact Gathering to the Federal at Bar Room, Kompleks Mahkamah Kota The speaker also included a sample of Islamic Court”, “The What Why and How of the Bharu. Ahmad Nizam b Muhammad gave an Intermediate Will in his notes and also a Communications Triangle”, “Crafting Each interesting talk on the issue. The response copy of the e-Wakaf. Witness’s Story”, “Confess and Avoid”, “Cross from the members was really good. Then, Indoctrination” and “Taking Charge in the on 24 May 2011, CLE organised a talk on On 18 Mar 2011, a PDC seminar on “Recent Moment”. “Civil Procedure — Part 1” featuring Mohd Tax Cases” was held at the KL Bar Auditorium. Rizwani b Adam. The subsequent event, a S Saravana Kumar and Siti Fatimah Mohd On 22 Mar 2011, a PDC seminar on talk on “Civil Procedure — Part 2” took Shahrom presented the seminar, which was “Preparation and Conducting Civil Trials” place on 1 June 2011. This talk was given attended by 46 participants. The cases that was held. Colin Andrew Pereira and Sanjeev by Nor Hayati bt Mohd Nawi. were covered at the seminar were CH Sdn Kumar Rasiah conducted the seminar, which Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri, was attended by 135 participants, at the KL In order to ensure that members live a healthy MHL Sdn Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Bar Auditorium. The speakers went through life and to encourage closer ties amongst Negeri, LKC & Anor v Ketua Pengarah Hasil the preliminaries of preparing agreed facts them, the Kelantan Bar Sports Committee Dalam Negeri, Ketua Pangarah Hasil Dalam and issues to be tried, summary of case, organised “Futsal For Fun 2011” on 18 June Negeri v Abdul Jalil bin Haji Hassan, Au How agreed bundle of documents and witness 2011 at Nick Futsal, Jalan Pasir Mas-Salor. Cheong Sdn Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Hasil statements. They also went through the steps The games was open for members and their Dalam Negeri and MD Sdn Bhd v Ketua of conducting a trial, which included the family, and pupils in chambers. Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri. opening speech, examination in chief, cross examination, re-examination and evidential Last but not least, in the middle of July 2011, On 19 Mar 2011, the first committee meeting issues. Participants were also given a sample the Kelantan Bar Committee will organise of the Kuala Lumpur Bar Young Lawyers of the plaintiff’s and defendant’s opening “Kelantan Bar Family Day 2011” for members Committee (“KLYLC”) for 2011/2012 was speech.
OnO 23 Mar 2011, a PDC seminar on “Human RightsR Law, Advocacy and Activism” was held.h The seminar, conducted by Amer HamzahH Arshad at the KL Bar Auditorium, wasw attended by 38 participants. The seminar starteds with a group workshop on human rrights case studies where the participants werew divided into 10 groups. Each group hadh to work on a case study to be presented ata the end of the seminar. The participants werew also given reading materials prior to thet seminar to prepare them for the group session.s The areas covered at the seminar were “International“ Human Rights Law (Treaties anda Instruments)”, “Limitations of Human Rights”,R “Human Rights and Law”, “State ofo Human Rights in Malaysia” and “What a Lawyer Can Do”.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 69 State Bar News
On 13 Apr 2011, a Lembaga Hasil Dalam partner. Each participant was also provided the briefing, which was presented by Hendon Negeri (“LHDN”) briefing on e-stamping with a nametag to sketch his or her partner’s Mohammad, valuable tips were offered to was held. Members of the Conveyancing face on. pupils sitting for the exam. Practice Committee attended the briefing at the invitation of the LHDN Cawangan Kuala After a scrumptious buffet lunch at the resort’s The KL Bar Environmental and Humanities Lumpur Bandar. The briefing was mainly to coffee house, the next agenda for the retreat Committee (“EHC”) organised a “Old/Disused inform Members of the Bar on how to use was a session where participants were asked Paper Collection” for the third consecutive the e-stamping (security) form in the STAMPS to list down the problems affecting themselves year for members to participate in the Earth application. Members of the Bar also provided as young lawyers, problems in relation to the Day Celebrations on 22 Apr 2011. This year, feedback and suggestions to improve the Bar and the nation as a whole. Amongst EHC carried out the exercise over a period of current form, as well as highlighting some the problems that affected young lawyers five days starting 18 Apr 2011 and ending of the arising issues related to e-stamping. were issues concerning low wages/salary, on Earth Day, 22 Apr 2011 at 3:00 pm. long working hours and heavy workload, no The exercise managed to collect 800kg On 15 Apr 2011, a PDC seminar on “An proper guidance/mentoring by senior lawyers, of old/disused paper. The paper collected Introduction to s 218 Companies Winding up feeling unappreciated, office politics, etc. was sold for recycling and the proceeds will Petitions” was held. Alex Chang presented be utilised for green projects by EHC. The the seminar at the KL Bar Auditorium. The Richard Wee, newly-elected Chairperson of main contributors were Chan Weng Keng seminar was attended by 71 participants. the Bar Council National Young Lawyers & Associates, the KL Bar Secretariat, Saha The speaker went through the distinctions Committee was kind enough to take some & Associates and Skrine. between a section 181 petition and a section time off his busy schedule to take part in 218 petition, “Affidavit Verifying Petition”, the retreat, where he conducted a training The EHC Deputy Chairperson, Noor Hajran “Appointment of a Provisional Liquidator session with the participants. Mohd Noor, appeared on a TV3 talk-show, under s 231”, “Advertisement of the Petition Malaysia Hari Ini, on 20 Apr 2011, where she in the Newspapers”, “Registrar’s Certificate”, As evening approached, participants were explained the importance and rationale of “Affidavit in Opposition to Petition”, “The told that the jungle trekking session had to lawyers getting involved in the Earth’s Day Unless Order”, “Appointment of Liquidator”, be postponed as that evening was darker celebration. She also touched on the history and “Costs and Advocacy in the Companies than usual, hence making it unsafe to behind Earth Day, the dire consequences Winding Up Court”. proceed. Later that night, before the start of uncontrolled carbon emission and why of the brainstorming session on aspirations KLBC was taking the lead in the five-day On 15 Apr 2011, the annual meet between and hopes for KLYLC, participants were all newspaper collection initiative at the KL Bar the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee (“KLBC”) blindfolded in an activity to walk towards a Secretariat. Noor Hajran Mohd Noor also and Selangor Bar Committee (“SBC”) was “voice”. The activity taught the participants suggested that the public was welcome to held at Mark’s Place in Kelana Jaya. The the importance of teamwork and working support this initiative, as the symbolism behind annual meet this term was hosted by the together in finding the “voice”. The night it was meaningful as to ensure quality living SBC. The objective of the annual meet was ended with a campfire session. for all of Earth’s inhabitants. In connection for the Office Bearers of KLBC and SBC of with this, one proposal she wanted people the new term to get to know each other and On Sunday morning, participants were divided to consider was the possibility of enforcing discuss how to work closely to cater to the into three groups for obstacle challenges and a “Minimum Packaging Act”, which would mutual needs of their respective members. outdoor team-building activities organised go a long way for less wastage and a healthy by the resort. Needless to say, this was in environment. Over the weekend of 16 and 17 Apr 2011, 36 fact one of the highlights of the retreat. new and old members of KLYLC participated The retreat’s finale was a session led by The KL Bar Secretariat also implemented the in a retreat at Bukit Gambang Resort City Kenneth Wong, where he unveiled the plans 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) programme Kuantan, Pahang. Nestled within the secondary and aspirations of KLYLC for the year 2011. in its office in support of EHC efforts in jungle in Gambang, Kuantan, the resort calling for less waste. provided the perfect environment for the As participants headed back to Kuala Lumpur retreat. Despite a rainy Saturday morning, the around 2:00 pm, it goes without saying that EHC would like to place on record their spirits of the enthusiastic participants who all 36 participants parted with better ties appreciation and thanks to all the lawyers had all gathered at the BHP Petrol Station, fostered, more focused on the expectations and staff of the KL Bar Secretariat who helped Gombak before leaving together in a convoy of the KLYLC, highly motivated and energised out during the entire period of the event. of nine cars, were not dampened. After to contribute to the Bar. a three-hour drive through the East Coast On 19 Apr 2011, a PDC seminar on Highway, the participants arrived safely at On 18 Apr 2011, a Pupils Welfare Committee “Shareholders Remedies: How to Slay a the resort. (“PWC”) dialogue on the Ethics and Dragon” was held. Professional Standards (“EPS”) examination The retreat began with a brief welcome was held. Pupils were briefed on the purpose The seminar was presented by Lee Shih at address by the KLYLC Chairperson, Kenneth of the EPS course and examination, as well as the KL Bar Auditorium and was attended by Wong Poh Lim, followed by an ice-breaking the expectations of the Bar Council Professional 89 participants. The speaker went through session. Participants were paired together Standards and Development Committee. A the rule in Foss v Harbottle, “The WMD’s: and required to briefly describe his or her total of 56 pupils attended the briefing. In Winding-up”, “Minority Oppression”,
70 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 State Bar News
“Derivative Action”, “Interim Remedies registered and took part in the tournament. of this meeting was to discuss the problems and the Statutory Injunction”, “Convening Team “River Pool FC” won the tournament. related to syariah matters in Negeri Sembilan. Meetings and Director’s Access to Records” The first runner-up was team “Real Kelong and “Arbitrating Shareholders Disputes”. FC” and the second runner-up was team Seremban lawyers were facing a lot of “The Beginner”. problems with Seremban court. In view The KL Bar Social, Arts and Culture Committee of this, the Committee decided to have a was invited to support a musical event Negeri Sembilan Bar Committee meeting, chaired by Tee Kim Chan, with organised by Atilia called “Acoustic Nights 2” members on 26 May 2011 for them to and was allocated free passes to two shows. On 26 Apr 2011, the Negeri Sembilan Bar voice out their grievances with the court The first show was held on 20 Apr 2011 Committee held a farewell party for Puan administration and process. with artists Joe Flizzow and PureVibracion, Rosenani bt Abdul Rahman, Senior Sessions and the second show took place on 24 Apr Court Judge, Court 1 at NS Bar Room at Apart from the activities above, the Bar Room 2011 with artists Yuna and Monoloque. 5:00 pm. The response was good. A gift has always been active with functions such as: The shows were held at the Kuala Lumpur was given as a token of appreciation for her (1) Investigation Tribunal meetings, etc; Performance Arts Centre (“KLPAC”). services rendered at the Court of Seremban. (2) Receptions for long calls to the Bar; and On 27 Apr 2011, a PDC seminar on “The The Committee held a courtesy call to DYMM (3) Annual General Meeting, committee Fundamentals of Civil Litigation” was held. Yang Dipertuan Besar Negeri Sembilan on meetings and subcommittee meetings. Colin Andrew Pereira presented the seminar at TheT Committee is scheduled the KL Bar Auditorium. tot have a talk on cervical It was attended by 129 cancerc by Dr Pang Mei Fong participants. The speakers ofo Columbia Asia Hospital, touched on opinion writing, Seremban,S on 16 June 2011 drafting of pleadings, ata the Negeri Sembilan Bar interlocutory applications, Room.R basic civil procedure, essentials of appearing in PahangP Bar Committee court and evidential issues during a trial. The speakers TThe Pahang Bar called for also gave an overview of ana Extraordinary General the appeal procedure. MeetingM on 21 Apr 2011 wherew it was unanimously On 29 Apr 2011, a PWC resolved,r among others, workshop on “Civil tthat the Pahang Bar set Litigation” was held. The upu a special and specific workshop, organised subcommittees to carry out specifically for pupils, ana in-depth study on all was conducted by Mohd mattersm relating to the rare Izral Mohamed Khairy and earthe plant being built by Tharminder Singh at 3:00 pm. The workshop 28 Apr 2011. During the courtesy call, the Lynas Malaysia Sdn Bhd at Gebeng, Kuantan, focused primarily on the practical aspects Committee took the opportunity to invite in particular regarding its suitability, the laws of handling a brief, covering areas such as DYMM Yang Dipertuan Besar and DYMM regarding construction and operation of the opinion writing, drafting of pleadings and Tunku Ampuan to their Annual Dinner & plant and disposal of radioactive waste. Also, presenting a case in court. The workshop Dance, which will be held at Royale Bintang, where necessary, the Pahang Bar is to provide was attended by 20 participants. Seremban on 24 Sept 2011. legal representation in the event of litigation that may ensue against Lynas and/or other Malacca Bar Committee On the very same day, the Committee met necessary parties. YA Dato’ Zulkafli b Bakar, Hakim Mahkamah The Malacca Bar Futsal Tournament (Ng Tinggi, together with other court officials Recently, the Pahang Bar was invited to present Kong Peng Challenge Trophy), organised where court problems were discussed. its representations before a review panel for the second time around by Malacca consisting of members from the International Bar, was held at 3:00 to 6:00 pm, at the A The Committee’s first Legal Aid Committee Atomic Energy Agency at Hyatt Regency Sport Arena Klebang Besar, Malacca on 7 meeting was held on 28 Apr 2011 where the Kuantan Resort. May 2011. This tournament was open to all Honorary Secretary was appointed and the members of Malacca Bar, pupils in chambers legal aid proposed activities were discussed. Penang Bar Committee and attachment students in Malacca. The challenge trophies were contributions from The first Syariah meeting held on 6 May Since the Annual General Meeting (“AGM”) Malacca Bar’s present Chairman, Ng Kong 2011 was chaired by Maishiah bt Hassan. that was held on 24 Feb 2011, the Penang Peng. This year, four teams of seven players The response was quite good. The purpose
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 71 State Bar News
Bar has been busy with a host of events and In a move to keep minds and bodies alert James Foong Cheng Yuen, and all the Penang activities for its members and chambering and active, a hike was co-organised by High Court Judges, Judicial Commissioners, pupils. the Social and Sports Subcommittees on 7 Registrars and Officers. May 2011 to the ever-popular Muka Head. Penang was chosen as the venue for a About 40 lawyers, pupils and their families The newly-elected Committee has also held “Mediation Training Course” that was held made the brave and early start at 7:30 am courtesy calls and meetings with local High from 30 Mar to 3 Apr 2011. The five-day on a Saturday morning with the lure of a Court Judges, Sessions Court Judges and course, conducted by Petra Oon and Serene barbeque brunch waiting for them at their Magistrates to raise concerns and problems Ong, was attended by 17 participants, which destination. This was the third time this very faced by members and hear issues from includedincluded both membersmembers muchmuc in demand hike the court which were then disseminated was organised and it was to members from time to time. enjoyedenjo by everyone. The Conveyancing Practice Subcommittee The Ethics and headed by Nazriah Shaik Alawdin has been ProfessionalPro Standards in regular dialogues and discussions with CourseCo was held on 13 various authorities such as the Penang Land andand 14 May 2011 for Office and Stamp Office on new directives that 6363 pupils from the were issued concerning the use of lawyers’ Penang,Pe Kedah/Perlis, cheques for transactions, among others. PerakPe and Kelantan BarBa Committees. The Among the talks and seminars that were teamte of esteemed held during the months of April and May lecturersl comprisedp was a forum on “Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code”, organised by the Criminal Law Subcommittee, featuring Dato’ V Sithambaram, a talk on “Effective Trial Advocacy” by Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar, and a talk entitled “The Law In My Lifetime” by Retired Judge of the Federal and non-members of the Bar from Court, Dato’ Seri Gopal Sri Ram. All events Penang, as well as other states. saw a good turnout by members and pupils due to the subject matters involved, as well On 2 Apr 2011, the final phase as the popularity and prominence of the of the MyConstitution Campaign speakers. themed “Rock 4 Rights” took place at Fort Cornwallis. The Members of the Criminal Law Subcommittee Penang Bar’s Legal Aid Centre and Legal Aid Centre have also held training set up a booth and presented sessions for pupils on the Dock Brief their Mobile Legal Aid Van (“MOBLAC”), PR Manecksha, Louis Van Programme on 20 Apr and 24 May 2011. which was manned by volunteer lawyers Buerle, Petra Oon, Mureli Navaratnam During the training, pupils were informed and pupils in chambers. and Tho Su-Fen. Bar Council member, of plea mitigation, as well as conduct and Hendon Mohamed had earlier presented decorum in court that had to be observed. The On 7 Apr 2011, members of the Penang Bar a briefing to the pupils on 4 May 2011 on trainings were conducted by V Parthipan, Dev Committee and Criminal Law Subcommittee the background and expectations of the Kumaraendran, Ravin Vello, Ravi Chandran paid a courtesy call on the Chief Police Officer course so the pupils could better prepare and Sukhinderpal Singh. of Penang, YBhg Dato’ Wira Ayub b Yaakob themselves for it and the written evaluation and his deputies. Various issues were raised that they would have to sit for. A luncheon The Penang Legal Aid Centre held its AGM and discussed, such as the introduction of was held at the end of the two-day course on the evening of 20 May 2011 at the newly Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan where the guest speaker was E Gnasegaran, opened, heritage-themed Penaga Hotel. The (“YGBK”) and cases involving lawyers. Chairperson of the Penang Bar. AGM was chaired by the two co-Chairpersons, Navinder Kaur Jessy and Abdul Fareed b The Annual Penang Bar Bowling Tournament The Penang Bar Committee has continued Abdul Gafoor. About 45 members and pupils was held on 23 Apr 2011 at the Penang Bowl to look into the various court issues that attended the AGM and stayed on for the with 20 participants consisting of members, crop up from time to time, the latest being high-tea that was served after that. pupils and former members. In a cruel twist the implementation of the E-Filing System of fate, the winner was Simon Tan, who was (“EFS”) at the Penang courts. The EFS was On 30 May 2011, a farewell dinner for the Organising Chairperson and Chairperson launched by the Right Honourable Chief Judge Judicial Commissioner, YA Tuan Vazeer Alam of the Sports Subcommittee! of Malaya, YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria on b Mydin Meera was held at the Penang 25 May 2011. Also present were Managing Club. YA Tuan Vazeer had been in Penang Judge for the Penang Courts, YA Tan Sri for nine months before being transferred
72 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 State Bar News
to the Kuala Lumpur High Court in April Bowling Badminton 2011. More than 65 members and pupils attended the dinner that was also attended The format of the game was 10 players from KY Chong and Tuan Haji Khairil took part by other Penang High Court Judges and each team, comprising of five ladies and in almost every men’s double games for Judicial Commissioners. five men. It was evident from the games the Perak Bar team. This was due to the that both PDRM and the Bench bowl like last minute absence of most Perak Bar star The Islamic Finance Subcommittee headed professional bowlers at par; if not similar, shuttlers on that particular day. PDRM emerged by Mohamed Ezri b Abdul Wahab held a to our skill in drafting an affidavit of service. as the winner, with the Bench second, and talk entitled “Introduction to Islamic Banking The Bench won this event with total pinfall Perak Bar third. Terminology” on 6 June 2011 at the Caring of 3,720 slightly edging out PDRM who Society Complex. The speaker was Santha finished with 3,712 whereby the Perak Bar Darts Ramachandram, a Member of the Bar. team scored a total of 2,932 pinfalls only. This was the game Perak Bar nearly won. Perak Bar Committee Netball Perak Bar lost by one point to PDRM and led the Bench by three points. A special word Bar-Bench-Polis DiRaja Malaysia Tripartite The Perak Bar netballers showed great team of thanks to Kenny Lai for his presence and Games 2011 Report spirit; they came and fought as one, and participation in the Perak Bar team. Out of organised their preparation diligently. The all the sports, this was the game where Perak Football first game against PDRM witnessed the Perak Bar’s player, Kiko Das, went on to claim the Bar Team giving PDRM a good fight, before overall best individual scores of 120. The Perak Bar football team opened the finally losing by 4-11. This was reasonable tournament with a narrow win on penalties score, compared to the other game whereby Irrespective of the outcome of shooting, against Polis DiRaja Malaysia (“PDRM”). Norali, PDRM thrashed the Bench by 13-1. The Bar, which was held on 17 June 2011, PDRM the new Perak Bar Number 9, scored on his however, managed to edge out the Bench by already emerged the overall winner of this debut and the keeper, Justin, was the hero 8-5 in the other round robin game. Therefore, tournament, followed by the Bench and of the game when he saved the last penalty overall for Netball, PDRM was the winner, Perak Bar. It is hoped that in the future, on sudden death. However, due to a lack with Perak Bar coming in second and the more members will come and join, not only of players from multiple injuries and other Bench third. in sports, but also in other programmes prior commitments, Perak Bar suffered heavy organised by Perak Bar Committee for the defeat of 1-5 against the Bench, whereby Volleyball benefit of members to foster better relations Ellangovan provided the consolation goal and camaraderie, as well as to have fun! in the second half. The score would have Without training, the Perak Bar team lost both been better had Perak Bar started with the games against the Bench and PDRM. Against Selangor Bar Committee full 11 players instead of just 10. In the final PDRM, the Perak Bar team managed to give game, the Bench defeated PDRM by 3-2 in a reasonable fight, considering some of the The Selangor Bar Committee hosted, organised a high- tension game. The overall result for players had just gotten to know each other and participated in various events over the football was as follows; the Bench retained on that particular morning itself. According past three months. the championship, followed by Perak Bar to the captain, Adham Jamalullail, with more and PDRM. training, this team can click and play well. As part of its continuing legal education PDRM was the overall winner, followed by initiative, the Committee organised talks the Bench and Perak Bar. and seminars on the following areas, namely
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 73 State Bar News
‘‘Advocacy & Decorum in Court/Duties of (2) Kenyir Trip by the Prime Minister of Malaysia, YAB Dato’ Counsel” by SS Muker, “Bankruptcy Law” by Sri Mohd Najib b Tun Abdul Razak. The visit Tejindarpal Kaur, “Remand, Bail & Criminal On 23 Apr 2011, the Terengganu Bar was also to bridge the gap between legal Advocacy” by Amritpal Singh, and “Bringing Committee organised a “survival trip” to practitioners and other agencies, especially Home the Message of Human Rights” by Kenyir Lake. This trip was well received by with the Marang Prison, in order to create Andrew Khoo. All talks were well attended. members of the Bar and was participated by 40 good rapport so that the administration lawyers, including pupils in chambers. The trip of justice between the prison and lawyers The Committee hosted its KL Bar counterparts was aimed at promoting interaction between could be dealt with smoothly. for the annual get-together on 16 Apr 2011. the senior and junior lawyers respectively. Committee members from both state bars Members departed from the Pengkalan Gawi (4) Meeting with the Ketua Polis Negeri got acquainted with each other and discussed jetty using two boathouses and berthed Terengganu SAC Dato’ Jamshah b issues, as well as exchanging ideas on common at the Sungai Lawit area. “Boatcooked” Mustapa concerns affecting both states. meals were prepared by the lawyer-chef, Aziz b Muda. Among the meals enjoyed A meeting with the Ketua Polis of Terengganu, The Selangor Legal Aid Centre carried out a by members were barbequed lamb and Dato’ Jamshah b Mustapa was held on 25 law awareness program at the Montford Boys nasi bukhari. With no telco connection in May 2011. The meeting was held, particularly Home Carnival on 8 May 2011. Volunteers the area, members were relieved, at least to discuss the implementation of the new were able to reach out to a diverse group temporarily, from the stress at work. The YBGK programme. Both sides concurred of the community to create awareness of apex of the trip was where members hiked that the success of the programme would their rights under the law. through the jungle for about 45 minutes to definitely be a cooperative effort between reach the Kelah Sanctuary and had a good the police and lawyers. The Committee met with Selangor CPO and time feeding tame fish that practically ate Selangor KUP on 11 and 13 May 2011, out of participants’ hands! It is hoped that (5) Informal Dinner with Chief Judge of respectively. Various issues relating to criminal the event will be organised annually as a Malaya, YAA Tan Sri Arifin b Zakaria practice in the state were raised for the police platform for members to interact actively, (Dato’ Lela Negara) and the prosecutors to address. especially to bridge the gap between senior and junior lawyers. On 5 June 2011, the Terengganu Bar organised E-filing was introduced to the Shah Alam an informal dinner at Primula Hotel with the courts on 23 May 2011. To ensure smoother (3) Marang Prison Visits Chief Judge of Malaya, YAA Tan Sri Arifin b implementation of the e-filing system, the Zakaria (Dato’ Lela Negara), to commemorate courts agreed to implement it in stages. On 26 Apr 2011, the Terengganu Bar arranged his visit to the state. Among other Federal The courts therefore introduced e-filing for a courtesy call with the Director of the Marang Court Judges who also attended the dinner fresh cases filed under codes 52, 52A, 72 Prison, Hamzani b Che Berahim. The aim for were YA Tan Sri Zulkefli b Ahmad Makinudin, and 72A only. this courtesy call, inter alia, was to inform YA Tan Sri Md Raus b Sharif and YA Tan Sri about the YBGK programme that had been Abdull Hamid b Embong. The event served On 11 June 2011, the Committee hostedosted its recentlyrecently launched itsit purpose where the cordial relationship annual Malam Suai Mesra at Shah VillageVillage betweenb the Bench and the Bar were upheld Hotel. The event saw an excellent forf the betterment of the legal community turn out of members of both the Bar ata large. and the Bench, dressed in cowboy and cowgirl outfits according to the theme Wild Wild West.
Terengganu Bar Committee
(1) Yayasan Bantuan Guamann Kebangsaan Training
A one-day seminar for the purposese of achieving the objective of Yayasanan Bantuan Guaman Kerajaan (“YBGK”) was held on 2 Apr 2011 at Hotel Seri Malaysia Kuala Terengganu. The successful seminar, which was attended by 70 members, was designed to expose lawyers to the procedures in conducting the YBGK cases in the future.
74 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Book Review
ASEAN Competition Law Author: Cleveland, Grover E by Dr Vince See, General Counsel of Malaysia Airlines
Parliament of Malaysia passed the first competition laws, including comprehensive, all-sector competition the latest member with such law in 2010. With the passing of the a law, namely, Malaysia. The Competition Act 2010, a massive wave chapter on the Malaysian of shocks swept through, not only the competition law is contributed business community, but legal practice as by Dr Wafi Nazrin. Dr Wafi is no well. Not only the business community is stranger to the legal profession eager to know the impact of Competition in Malaysia. He obtained his Act 2010 on their business practices law degree (first class honours) and commercial contracts, lawyers, both from the International Islamic inhouse counsel and those in private University in Malaysia before practice, are desperate to learn the various pursuing his postgraduate legal principles, notions and doctrines studies in law in England where underlying the law, not to mention the he obtained his doctorate from intricate economic principles underlying the University of Southampton, the region. the economic analysis of the law. This is a having completed his research on It demystifies competition fair observation from various conferences maritime law. Dr Wafi, in his capacity law for businessmen, lawyers and and workshops that have been held in the as Chief Risk Officer & Executive Vice- policymakers by concisely examining and past few months where turnout was more President, Public Relations, Malaysia analysing both existing and prospective than expected. Airlines (“MAS”), has been actively competition laws in each country. Simple involved in competition law. MAS has met in language, the ASEAN Competition Law With such demand in mind, initiatives with a number of antitrust investigations not only explains the law but provides have been taken to have a practitioners’ and litigations in many jurisdictions in step-by-step guidance on important volume, which includes a chapter on the its worldwide business operations. It is procedural matters. Of particular value Malaysian competition law, published. In no secret that MAS together with many to businessmen, lawyers and particularly economic terminology, the demand was other world-established airlines was corporate counsel operating across the there and it is now met with the supply. investigated by, amongst others, the region are the comparisons made between Nevertheless, with the law at its incipient European Competition Commission for the different ASEAN countries. References stage, it poses an immense challenge alleged involvements in cartel activities in will also be made, where relevant, to for any author to write a chapter on its air cargo business. With his ingenious the jurisprudence and policy issues from the Competition Act 2010. It is more so manoeuvres behind the scene and Australia, the United States and the challenging where the materials have to instructions to external counsel, Dr Wafi European Union, the last being the source be substantive enough to guide the legal was instrumental in ensuring that MAS from which most ASEAN competition law practitioners as they navigate through the manage to get off the investigations with draws base. winding path of competition law, but at no impunity, while other airlines suffered the same time concise enough to enable financial penalties in the range of millions The ASEAN Competition Law was the legal practitioners to get a quick of Euros. launched by YB Dato’ Sri Ismail Sabri b answer. That is exactly what the chapter Yaakob, Minister of Domestic Trade, Co- on the Malaysian competition law has In sum, the chapter on competition law operatives and Consumerism, on 27 June succeeded in doing. in Malaysia marks a bold, significant 2011 at the JW Marriott Hotel, Kuala step towards building competition Lumpur. To purchase this book, please As its name suggests, the volume on jurisprudence with a Malaysian flair. visit our online bookstore at http://www. ASEAN Competition Law comprises lexisnexis.com/store/my/ to place your contributions on competition law from a The ASEAN Competition Law looseleaf order. Alternatively, you may contact our number of ASEAN member countries with is written by senior practising experts in Helpdesk at 1-800-80-6374.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 75 By the Way ...
Conveyancing Law by Editor
12
3 4 5
67
8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15
16
17
18 19
Across 20 3. layer of structure (6) 8. develops area of real estate for sale (9) 9. affect change in ownership (8) 10. property deed (5) 21 11. property (6) 13. fine for late payment (8) 15. give (5) 16. document to show power to act (2) 18. term (6) 20. right (6) 21. paid upfront to secure property (7)
Down
21. DEPOSIT 21. 1. acquiescence (7)
19. SPA 19.
20. OPTION 20. 2. value relinquished (13)
17. EARNEST 17.
18. CLAUSE 18. 4. real estate middlemen (5)
14. ESTATE 14.
16. PA 16. 5. more time (9) 12. TENANCY 12.
15. GRANT 15. 6. buyer (9) 7. FORFEIT 7.
13. INTEREST 13. 7. penalty (7) 6. PURCHASER 6.
11. REALTY 11. 12. lease (7) 5. EXTENSION 5.
AnswersTITLE 10. 14. property owned (6) 4. AGENT 4. 9. TRANSFER 9.
2. CONSIDERATION 2. 8. DEVELOPER 8. 17. genuinely made (7)
1. CONSENT 1. 3. STRATA 3. 19. agreement to sell and buy (3)
Down Across
76 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 By the Way ...
SUDOKU Sudoku is a game of logic and deduction, with the objective of filling all the blank squares with the correct numbers in the 9x9 game square, subject to the following rules: • Every row and every column of nine numbers must include all digits, 1 through 9, in any order; and
• Every 3x3 subsection of the 9x9 square must include all digits, 1 through 9.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 77
Bar Updates/Notices
NEW TELEPHONE SYSTEM AND CHANGE OF TELEPHONE NUMBER
One of the most frequent complaints from Please note that the new general number is Members of the Bar is that it is difficult to contact 03-2050 2050, effective immediately. The old the Bar Council Secretariat by telephone. We are hunting line (03-2031 3003) has been phased out. happy to inform you that one of the steps being The fax numbers remain unchanged. taken to address this problem is the introduction of a new telephone system. We look forward to serving you better with this new telephone system. The new telephone system includes features such as multi-level auto attendant, voicemail, call forwarding and call recording, which will enable BAR COUNCIL MALAYSIA callers to reach specific departments more easily. 15 Leboh Pasar Besar 50050 Kuala Lumpur The recording of all incoming and outgoing calls Tel: 03-2050 2050 will allow staff performance to be monitored for Fax: 03-2026 1313 / 03-2034 2825 / 03-2072 5818 Email: [email protected] quality assurance and training purposes. Website: http://www.malaysianbar.org.my
NEW ADMISSIONS TO THE MALAYSIAN BAR (January–May 2011)
SIJIL NAME DATE CALLED TO N/2029 Nor Nazirah bt A Rahim 7 Jan 2011 ANNUAL THE BAR N/2008 Noriza bt Rosli 7 Jan 2011 NO N/2005 Nur Bahirah bt Abdul Rahman 7 Jan 2011 A/1785 Amirul Haziq b Noordin 7 Jan 2011 N/2019 Nur Sakinah bt Salleh @ Ali 7 Jan 2011 B/260 Bashiroh bt Yaakub 7 Jan 2011 N/2003 Nurul Hidayah bt Abdull Rahim 7 Jan 2011 C/1421 Chin Jing Shen 7 Jan 2011 N/2036 Nurul Khairani bt Abdul Rashid 7 Jan 2011 F/491 Fatihah Iliani bt Jamhari 7 Jan 2011 N/2025 Nurul Nadhirah bt Mohamed Sabri 7 Jan 2011 F/490 Fiona Fong 7 Jan 2011 N/2009 Nurwahidah bt Ab Wahab 7 Jan 2011 G/454 Gauri Mageswari a/p Kanasan 7 Jan 2011 S/2357 Salwani bt Muhamed 7 Jan 2011 G/452 Goh Gin Jhen 7 Jan 2011 S/2351 Sheik Azri b Shaik Md Noor Alam 7 Jan 2011 G/453 Goh Toh Wone 7 Jan 2011 Z/402 Zhafran b Tajudin 7 Jan 2011 H/840 Hafilah bt Hamzah 7 Jan 2011 A/1789 Arnie Azlin bt Che Arifin 14 Jan 2011 H/836 Ho Miaw Queen 7 Jan 2011 F/488 Farah Sherwani bt Md Tahir 14 Jan 2011 H/834 How Lean Giap 7 Jan 2011 L/1935 Lim Chen Keat 14 Jan 2011 I/239 Izahairani bt Izani 7 Jan 2011 L/1939 Lim Wan Tse 14 Jan 2011 J/542 Jasvinder Singh a/l Surinder Singh 7 Jan 2011 N/2034 Nasreen bt Mohamed Rafith 14 Jan 2011 K/1022 Kamar Aliyaa bt Kamarudin 7 Jan 2011 M/1971 Murgan a/l D Maniam 14 Jan 2011 L/1938 Lavania a/p Ramakrishnan 7 Jan 2011 C/1422 Choo Sui Ching 19 Jan 2011 M/1978 Madihah bt Mohd Faizi 7 Jan 2011 M/2019 Mohd Azhan b Nazli 19 Jan 2011 M/1993 Mashitah bt Ramlan 7 Jan 2011 S/2362 Shahidatun Noorashikin bt Suit 19 Jan 2011 M/1990 Md Faiez b Md Suhaimi 7 Jan 2011 S/2377 Siti Zuhairah bt Zulkifli 19 Jan 2011 M/1976 Md Syahmi Hasif b Muhammad 7 Jan 2011 A/1802 Anis Diana bt Mohamed Aluwi 21 Jan 2011 M/1986 Michelle Ong Ker Lern 7 Jan 2011 A/1792 Atiza Nur bt Abd Rahman 21 Jan 2011 M/1991 Mohamed Hafiq b Hasan Basri 7 Jan 2011 A/1795 Azlynne Amanda Yuen 21 Jan 2011 M/1989 Mohd Iwaz b Abdul Hadi 7 Jan 2011 A/1791 Azraa Fardilla bt Ab Rahim 21 Jan 2011 M/1983 Mohd Khairil Izzi b Talha 7 Jan 2011 A/1796 Azrin Zarina bt Abd Ragis 21 Jan 2011
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 79 Bar Updates/Notices
C/1426 Chan Hean Lee 21 Jan 2011 N/2046 Nurjeehan bt Abd Jabar 11 Feb 2011 C/1423 Chew Bee Ling 21 Jan 2011 Z/404 Zati Farahiyah bt A Halim 11 Feb 2011 C/1424 Chin Mei Hwa 21 Jan 2011 M/1988 Mohd Aizuddin b Baharum 18 Feb 2011 C/1429 Chin Mei Xiong 21 Jan 2011 S/2364 Salmah bt Darjad 24 Feb 2011 F/496 Fariza bt Mohamad Nasir 21 Jan 2011 E/219 Eric Aloysius Augustin 25 Feb 2011 F/489 Faten Ellyni bt Md Yasin 21 Jan 2011 N/2032 Naizatul Zamrina bt Karizaman 25 Feb 2011 F/494 Fida Izrina bt Izhar 21 Jan 2011 N/2030 Narainasami a/l SM Alagu 25 Feb 2011 G/451 Gan Chee Wei 21 Jan 2011 S/2361 Shuhaila bt Ruhi 25 Feb 2011 H/839 Hwang Poh Geok 21 Jan 2011 T/1396 Tan Shi Wen 25 Feb 2011 I/241 Irnie Furzannie bt Azroie 21 Jan 2011 T/1395 Tan Zui Xiang 25 Feb 2011 L/1947 Lim Chew Liang 21 Jan 2011 V/257 Varunnath a/l Viswanathan 25 Feb 2011 L/1944 Lim Sze Chan 21 Jan 2011 C/1432 Chee Yu Ching Victoria 11 Mar 2011 L/1942 Linda Lee Ching Ching 21 Jan 2011 K/1027 Kee Huey Sin 11 Mar 2011 L/1943 Lye Ca-Ryn 21 Jan 2011 L/1952 Leanne Kok Li-Yen 11 Mar 2011 M/1984 Michael a/l Anthony 21 Jan 2011 A/1805 Alia Shafinaz bt Bustamah 18 Mar 2011 M/1974 Mohammad Iliyas b Razali 21 Jan 2011 A/1803 Azhana bt Mohd Khairudin 18 Mar 2011 M/1980 Mohd Azwan b Mohd Roslee 21 Jan 2011 F/497 Farah Dila bt Ahmad 18 Mar 2011 M/1995 Mohd Hafiz b Shukery 21 Jan 2011 L/1948 Leong Kai Bin 18 Mar 2011 M/1985 Muralidharan a/l Kalidass 21 Jan 2011 M/2003 Mohd Abdul Hakim b Mohd Ali 18 Mar 2011 N/2018 Nadiah bt Mohd Redzuan 21 Jan 2011 M/1994 Muhammad Afiq b Mohamad Noor 18 Mar 2011 N/2048 Naidatul Ilani bt Mohd @ Zawawi 21 Jan 2011 M/1992 Muhammad Hafez b Mohd Azhar 18 Mar 2011 N/2041 Najlaa bt Haridan 21 Jan 2011 N/2044 Nadira bt Mad Sidin 18 Mar 2011 N/2011 Noor Adilah bt Zarian 21 Jan 2011 N/2055 Nur Humairrah bt Abdul Rahman 18 Mar 2011 N/2024 Noor Sharizan bt Ramli 21 Jan 2011 S/2365 Siti Zubaidah bt Mohamed 18 Mar 2011 N/2021 Nor Amalina bt Arshad 21 Jan 2011 A/1810 Ahmad Zuhairi b Ahmed Zubair 24 Mar 2011 N/2031 Nor Hashimah bt Abd Rahman 21 Jan 2011 O/352 Ooi Su Yee 1 Apr 2011 N/2050 Nurul Asyiqin bt Md Nazeri 21 Jan 2011 S/2372 Siti Hajar bt Mat Radzi 1 Apr 2011 N/2020 Nurul Rofli Husna bt Ramli 21 Jan 2011 A/1804 Abu Dzar b Hamzah 4 Apr 2011 N/2033 Nurzila bt Selamat 21 Jan 2011 A/1806 Ahmad Hafiz b Zubir 4 Apr 2011 O/350 Ong Ming Yang 21 Jan 2011 A/1807 Anis Bazilah bt Abd Ghani 4 Apr 2011 P/458 Priya Sirisena 21 Jan 2011 F/498 Farrah Erika bt Abd Gaffoor 4 Apr 2011 R/1019 Raihana bt Abdul Rahman 21 Jan 2011 H/843 Hanis bt Basir 4 Apr 2011 R/1017 Rozailiya bt Abdullah Sani 21 Jan 2011 K/1023 Khairil Ahmad b Rusli 4 Apr 2011 S/2353 Santhirahasan a/l Thavasy 21 Jan 2011 K/1024 Kiang Lee Lian 4 Apr 2011 S/2360 Shahida bt Najme Khir 21 Jan 2011 L/1957 Loo Pei Gie 4 Apr 2011 S/2354 Sharon Tee Kwee Ying 21 Jan 2011 M/1996 Mohd Azrul Hasyimi b Mohammad 4 Apr 2011 S/2363 Siti Marlia bt Hamzah 21 Jan 2011 M/2016 Mohd Faiz b Abd Rahim 4 Apr 2011 S/2367 Siti Nurul Hidayah bt Ishak 21 Jan 2011 M/1997 Mohd Imran b Tamrin 4 Apr 2011 S/2355 Sivagami a/p Sivalingam 21 Jan 2011 M/1998 Mohd Rizal b Kamarulzaman 4 Apr 2011 T/1393 Teh Peh Hun 21 Jan 2011 M/1999 Mohd Rizam b Razman 4 Apr 2011 T/1398 Teo Yevon 21 Jan 2011 M/2000 Muhammad Afiq b Ahmad Tajuddin 4 Apr 2011 U/61 Ummu Salmah Yasmin bt Mohd Ariff 21 Jan 2011 N/2058 Noor Shamiza bt Sayuti 4 Apr 2011 W/686 Wan Khairul Anwar b Manan 21 Jan 2011 N/2053 Nur Atiqah bt Md Adnan 4 Apr 2011 Z/405 Zainal b Narudin 21 Jan 2011 P/459 Patrina Yeang Cheng Chieh 4 Apr 2011 S/2374 Safrina bt Saadan 22 Jan 2011 S/2368 Saidatul Nadia bt Abd Aziz 4 Apr 2011 A/1793 Amir Rizal Khan b Yusuf Khan 28 Jan 2011 S/2375 Siti Nurulhasmah bt Ahmad 4 Apr 2011 C/1428 Cheng Mun Mun 28 Jan 2011 S/2380 Sujatha a/p Ganasegeran 4 Apr 2011 K/1025 Keith Christopher Yeoh Min Kit 28 Jan 2011 T/1397 Tan Bee Ean 4 Apr 2011 L/1941 Lena Chik See Yen 28 Jan 2011 Y/618 Yap Teck Sing 4 Apr 2011 N/2013 Nandha Kumar a/l Murugan 28 Jan 2011 W/691 Wan Nurulmaziah bt Abdullah 7 Apr 2011 N/2037 Nurul Bazlaa’ bt Sadikin 28 Jan 2011 A/1808 Agnes Wan Hui Shing 8 Apr 2011 S/2352 Shareen Fiza bt Arshad 28 Jan 2011 A/1809 Aziizul Hakiim b Razali 8 Apr 2011 S/2358 Suayri a/l Ayyapan 28 Jan 2011 C/1431 Chang Ying Ying 8 Apr 2011 U/62 Ummu Syifa’ bt Mahamad Puzi 28 Jan 2011 C/1437 Chen Wei Kent 8 Apr 2011 M/1975 Masitah bt Mohd Noor 2 Feb 2011 G/456 Goh Han Koon 8 Apr 2011 W/688 Wan Ahamad Fadzil b Wan Omar 2 Feb 2011 K/1032 Khairul Anuar b Kashim 8 Apr 2011 F/495 Fairuz Zafirah bt Zainudin Merican 11 Feb 2011 M/2006 Mohamad Naguib b Mahmad Nor 8 Apr 2011 H/841 Hafsham b Harasid 11 Feb 2011 N/2054 Norhashimah bt Hashim 8 Apr 2011 L/1945 Lim Sin Tian 11 Feb 2011 N/2051 Nur Hidayah bt Mohamed 8 Apr 2011
80 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
S/2376 Suraya Yasmin bt Baharuddin 8 Apr 2011 O/355 Ooi Ying Yik 6 May 2011 Z/407 Zeti bt Talim 8 Apr 2011 S/2379 Serena Ong Suan Huey 6 May 2011 I/245 Ili Najlaa bt Karmaine 12 Apr 2011 S/2382 Shafiqah Hana bt Nor Haminudin 6 May 2011 N/2057 Nur Leayana bt Hamzah 12 Apr 2011 V/258 Veronica Chuah Xin Jie 6 May 2011 S/2378 Shahizan bt Sarmijan 12 Apr 2011 A/1813 Amira Farhana bt Mohd Yasin 10 May 2011 A/1812 Aini Murni bt Abd Hamid 15 Apr 2011 F/499 Fadzlin bt Mohd Yunos 10 May 2011 C/1436 Chong Bei Lin 15 Apr 2011 K/1030 Kooi Wei Kit 10 May 2011 G/457 Gan Chwee Yen 15 Apr 2011 L/1960 Lim Boon Bee 10 May 2011 H/842 Herliyana bt Jumali 15 Apr 2011 L/1964 Lim Kah Pei 10 May 2011 I/251 Ian Shang Kuan Chou Chuen 15 Apr 2011 L/1965 Loke Yuen Hong 10 May 2011 I/247 Indiraa a/p Pitchaiappan 15 Apr 2011 L/1963 Low Shieh Mei 10 May 2011 I/243 Irene Ho Chia Hooi 15 Apr 2011 M/2012 Melanie Ho Mei Yee 10 May 2011 I/244 Iris Koh Siau Wei 15 Apr 2011 M/2011 Muaz b Mohammad Lamappan Ganro 10 May 2011 K/1026 Khon Chee Peng 15 Apr 2011 C/1438 Ching Kuan Fang 13 May 2011 L/1951 Liang Chor Soon 15 Apr 2011 L/1958 Lim Wei Loon 13 May 2011 M/2005 Malliga Devi a/p N Vadiveloo 15 Apr 2011 M/2013 Michael Tan Ching Hooi 13 May 2011 M/2004 Mohammad Fauzi b Abdullah 15 Apr 2011 M/2018 Mohd Nazri b Yahya 13 May 2011 M/2014 Mohd Azinuddin b Abd Karim 15 Apr 2011 R/1021 Rozliana bt Amir 13 May 2011 M/2007 Muhammad Azim b Abd Ghani 15 Apr 2011 S/2384 Sushma Tiwari a/p Karam Shankar 13 May 2011 N/2060 Nadiatul Awaleen bt Abd Hamid 15 Apr 2011 J/545 Juliza bt Osman 19 May 2011 N/2061 Noor Emilia bt Ahmad Safri 15 Apr 2011 A/1817 Ahmad Fuad b Hasim 20 May 2011 N/2062 Nurul Izyan bt Mudzafar 15 Apr 2011 A/1816 Amy Saw Jing Jing 20 May 2011 N/2065 Nurul Nasyrah bt Mohd Nasir 15 Apr 2011 H/844 Ho Wee Loon 20 May 2011 O/354 Ong Lih Shan 15 Apr 2011 L/1961 Liang Mi Tieng @ Leong Mi Tieng 20 May 2011 P/460 Phang Soon Mun 15 Apr 2011 N/2064 Nora Affizza bt Mohd Rassul 20 May 2011 P/461 Ponnusamy a/l Kalaichelvan 15 Apr 2011 N/2072 Norazalina bt Hairuddin 20 May 2011 S/2370 Siti Hafizah bt Mohamed Ibrahim 15 Apr 2011 R/1022 Raihana bt Halmi 20 May 2011 T/1402 Toh Chin Lee 15 Apr 2011 V/259 Venny Shu Nyet Moi 15 Apr 2011 W/689 Wong Chee Yen 15 Apr 2011 W/690 Wong Xien Yee 15 Apr 2011 Y/616 Yong Hooi Chie 15 Apr 2011 NOTIS PEMBERITAHUAN I/246 Ima Shafini bt Wahidin 18 Apr 2011 K/1028 Khoh Swee Yin 22 Apr 2011 Sila Ambil Perhatian saya Manan Bin Maulana L/1959 Loges a/l Tiyagarajan 22 Apr 2011 M/2010 Mariammah a/p Bharathan 22 Apr 2011 (NO.K/P:301019-05-5001) memaklumkan pada T/1400 Teo Ah Ai 22 Apr 2011 A/1814 Adrisyawalia bt Che Din 28 Apr 2011 tahun 1946 Harun Bin Malan, beralamat di Kg. G/458 Gan Poh Chin 28 Apr 2011 Daching Ulu, Beranang, 71760 Lenggeng, Negeri L/1955 Lee Chong Hong 28 Apr 2011 M/2021 Mariana bt Matkudin 28 Apr 2011 Sembilan, telah hilang dan tidak dapat dikesan N/2052 Ng Nyet Kheng 28 Apr 2011 sehingga sekarang. Saya adik ingin memohon T/1401 Tan Yen Lin 28 Apr 2011 M/2009 Mohd Fikah b Sanusi 29 Apr 2011 kepada Mahkamah Tinggi Seremban untuk N/2059 Nadhira bt Maridan 29 Apr 2011 pindahmilik tanah yang dimiliki olehnya G.M. N/2063 Nurul Nadia bt Mohd Izmir 29 Apr 2011 S/2369 Sandraruben a/l Neelamagham 29 Apr 2011 3348, G.M. 2324, Lot No. 3936, Lot 1833, Mukim S/2381 Siti Hajar bt Badasary 29 Apr 2011 Lenggeng, Daerah Seremban, Dalam Negeri Z/406 Zurriana bt Hussain 29 Apr 2011 C/1439 Chuah Chen Yean 5 May 2011 Sembilan didaftar atas nama saya. Sesiapa yang A/1815 Alice Lim Hui Chee 6 May 2011 I/248 Irene a/p Arikisamy 6 May 2011 mempunyai maklumat tentang penama diatas atau J/544 Jayasree a/p Veerasamy 6 May 2011 mempunyai kepentingan terhadap tanah tersebut J/543 Jegathisvaran a/l Ramachandram 6 May 2011 L/1954 Lai Wern Ching 6 May 2011 atau mempunyai apa jua maklumat mengenai M/2017 Mohd Zaidi b Zakara 6 May 2011 penama boleh hubungi kami ditalian 06-7990116/7 N/2066 Noor Azah bt Zainal 6 May 2011 N/2069 Noor Liana bt Hashim 6 May 2011 untuk sebarang pertanyaan mengenainya. N/2070 Nora Amyrah bt Nozli 6 May 2011
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 81 Bar Updates/Notices
SUMMARY OF CIRCULARS (April–June 2011)
Circular No Title Summary
082/2011 Members Struck Off the Roll of Advocates and Solicitors in 2010 A notice, consisting of the names of Members of the Bar who were struck off the Roll of advocates and solicitors in 2010, has been advertised on 30 and 31 Mar 2011 in major newspapers. Kindly advise your clients, who have any claims against the defaulting advocates and solicitors, to lodge their claims with Bar Council. Members of the public who have sustained any loss owing to the dishonesty of these struck-off advocates and solicitors may make an application for a grant out of the Compensation Fund. Access this circular to view the list of struck-off lawyers.
084/2011 Email Scams and Fraudulent Schemes by Unauthorised Persons Bar Council is concerned about the growing number of reports and complaints received in relation to persons who hold themselves out as being authorised to offer legal services to the general public, or who masquerade as advocates and solicitors registered with Bar Council. We urge all Members to be wary of such scams and to report them to Bar Council. In the event of any doubt, Members of the Bar are advised to verify the identity and status of the lawyer or legal firm they are dealing with, by consulting the Malaysian Bar website, or by contacting the Bar Council Secretariat.
087/2011 Requests for Postponement of Cases in the Industrial Court YA Puan Susila Sithamparam, President of the Industrial Court of Malaysia, has informed us that one reason frequently used by lawyers to seek the postponement of cases is their involvement in hearings in the other courts. As hearing dates in the Industrial Court are fixed with the consent of both parties, the President of the Industrial Court hopes that, where applicable, lawyers will inform the judges in the other courts that they are involved in hearings in the Industrial Court, the dates of which had been previously agreed to.
088/2011 Non-Compliance with Solicitors’ Remuneration Order 2005 May Non-compliance with the scale fees specified in the Solicitors’ Remuneration Void Professional Indemnity Insurance Cover Order 2005 (“SRO 2005”), ie overcharging or giving discount of fees and disbursements, is a misconduct under the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 1976 and may also fall within the definition of “misconduct” under the Malaysian Bar Professional Indemnity Insurance (“PII”) Scheme. Where a Member of the Bar is found guilty of professional misconduct for having breached the SRO 2005, the Member’s PII cover may be rendered void in respect of that particular transaction.
096/2011 Update on the E-filing System Access this circular to view the update on the e-filing system, including notices by the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee on the workings of the e-filing system.
098/2011 Use of Audio Conferencing for Case Management Audio conferencing dispenses with the physical attendance of counsel at the case management. Members of the Bar are strongly urged to consider taking advantage of the use of the audio conferencing facilities provided by the court if and when notices are issued by the courts in this regard.
104/2011 Accountant’s Report 2010 Pursuant to section 79 of the Legal Profession Act 1976, the Accountant’s Report is required to be submitted by sole proprietors or partners in respect of the client accounts maintained during an accounting period for the issuance of Sijil Annual unless exempted pursuant to rule 6 of the Accountant’s Report Rules 1990. Bar Council strongly recommends that Members instruct their accountants to conduct an audit of their client accounts and prepare the Accountant’s Report for the year 2010 in conjunction with the preparation of tax returns for submission to the Inland Revenue Department, on or before 30 June 2011, for the issuance of Sijil Annual 2012.
107/2011 Extraction of Draft Orders, Sealed Orders and Summons in The Managing Judge of the Shah Alam Civil High Court has informed that Chambers Filed in 2010 and Before at the Shah Alam Civil High Members who have yet to be able to extract draft Orders, Sealed Orders and Court and Processing Draft Order and Sealed Order on the Same Summons in Chambers filed at the Shah Alam Civil High Court should submit Day their case number to Deputy Registrar Puan Tasnim binti Abu Bakar by fax at 03-5510 8679 so that prompt action can be taken.
109/2011 Practice Direction No 3 of 2011 | Appointment under Rule 32, The Chief Registrar of the Federal Court has notified us regarding Practice Companies (Winding-up) Rules 1972 Direction No 3 of 2011, relating to fixing of appointments for a petitioner or his/ her legal counsel to appear before the Registrar for winding-up cases under code 28, as provided for in Rule 32, Companies (Winding-up) Rules 1972. Practice Direction No 3 of 2011 took effect on 13 May 2011.
82 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
110/2011 Second Update on the E-filing System Access this circular to view the: (1) Notices issued by the Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee to its members regarding the e-filing system; and (2) List of states where the e-filing system will be implemented.
111/2011 Notice of Transfer for the NCvC/FLJC Unit of the Shah Alam High The Timbalan Pendaftar, Mahkamah Tinggi NCvC Shah Alam has informed Court that the NCvC/FLJC unit, which currently operates at “Sayap Kanan, Bangunan KMSA”, will be transferred and begin operation at “Aras 6, Bangunan Annexed, KMSA” from 6 June 2011.
115/2011 Notice Regarding Parking at Petaling Jaya Courts The Selangor Bar Committee has informed that the Petaling Jaya courts have agreed that no parking fees or requirement for car stickers will be imposed to those who utilise the car park of the Petaling Jaya courts to attend court. Please be informed that the car park of the Petaling Jaya courts may be utilised by Members and the public free of charge.
117/2011 Practice Direction No 5 of 2011 | Registration of Corruption Cases The Chief Registrar of the Federal Court has extended to us a copy of Practice at Sessions Court, Registration of Foreclosure Cases at High Court Direction No 5 of 2011, relating to the registration of corruption cases at Sessions Court and the registration of foreclosure cases at High Court. Please be informed that corruption cases should be registered under “Kod 61R” and “Kod 62R”, while foreclosure cases should be registered under “Kod 24F”. Practice Direction No 5 of 2011 took effect from 1 June 2011 for states that do not utilise the CMS system. The relevant date for states that utilise the CMS system will be announced later.
118/2011 Practice Direction No 6 of 2011 | Issuance of Order to Produce The Chief Registrar of the Federal Court has extended to us a copy of Practice Direction No 6 of 2011, which directs the Courts to issue and serve the Order to Produce on prison authorities at least seven days before the date of hearing or mention to ensure the attendance of a detained accused. Practice Direction No 6 of 2011 came into effect on 24 May 2011.
119/2011 Guidelines for E-filing Via Service Bureau Access this circular to view the: (1) List of states where the e-filing system has been implemented; and (2) Guidelines for e-filing via service bureau prepared by the courts to assist Members and to expedite the filing process.
120/2011 Fingerprint Requirement on Documents Attested by Commissioners According to the letter dated 19 May 2011, the Chief Justice of Malaysia has for Oaths instructed all Commissioners for Oaths to ensure that deponents impress their fingerprints on register books and all attested documents. The President of the Malaysian Bar has taken immediate steps to address this issue and the Judiciary has agreed that the fingerprint requirement will apply only to documents for use in Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan Malaysia (“JPJ”) matters thus excluding, amongst others, all court papers from the application of the letter, unless the deponent of affidavit chooses to use his or her fingerprint. We understand that a letter of clarification will be issued shortly by the Judiciary to this effect.
122/2011 Registration of Foreclosure Cases for Muamalat Cases pursuant to The Chief Registrar of the Federal Court has directed via a letter dated 27 May Practice Direction No 5 of 2011 2011 that foreclosure cases for Muamalat cases must be registered under “Kod 24AF”. Please be informed that this direction also applies to all High Courts that have foreclosure cases registered under “Kod 24A” for Muamalat cases. This addition to Practice Direction No 5 of 2011 came into effect on 1 June 2011 for states that do not utilise the CMS system. The effective date for states that utilise the CMS system will be announced later.
123/2011 Instruction from the Chief Justice of Malaysia Regarding Fingerprint We have been informed by the Chief Registrar of the Federal Court that the Requirement on Documents and Register Books Chief Justice of Malaysia has instructed all Commissioners for Oaths to ensure that deponents impress their fingerprints on all attested documents and register books that involve transactions with Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan Malaysia (“JPJ”) only. This instruction took effect from 8 June 2011.
133/2011 Practice of Inflating Purchase Price in Sale and Purchase Agreements Access this circular to find out more about the Bar Council Conveyancing for the Purpose of Obtaining a Higher Loan Amount Practice Committee’s view on the practice of inflating purchase price in sale and purchase agreements for the purpose of obtaining a higher loan amount.
The list above highlights some of Bar Council’s circulars sent out to Members of the Bar between April and June 2011 via email. Access the Malaysian Bar website at www.malaysianbar.org.my to view these, and many other circulars in full. Please note that some circulars are only accessible if you are a registered user of the Malaysian Bar website.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 83 Bar Updates/Notices
LIBRARY UPDATES LEGISLATIONS (April–June 2011)
ACT 726 SUSTAINABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT 2011 BILLS 2011 An Act to provide for the establishment of the Sustainable Energy Development PUBLICATION Authority Malaysia and to provide for its functions and powers and for related TITLE DATE matters. w.e.f.:- Not yet in force Judges Remuneration (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.5/2011] 17/3/2011 ACT 727 FOOD ANALYSTS ACT 2011 International Organizations (Privileges and Immunities) (Amendment) Act An Act to provide for the establishment of the Malaysian Food Analysts Council, to 14/4/2011 2011 [DR.8/2011] provide for the registration of persons practising as food analysts and to regulate the practice of food analysts and for matters connected therewith. Kootu Funds (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act 2011 [DR.4/2011] 17/3/2011 w.e.f.:- Not yet in force Malaysian Industrial Development Authority (Incorporation) (Amendment) 14/4/2011 Act 2011 [DR.7/2011] ACT SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (2010) ACT 2011 A1392 An Act to apply a sum from the Consolidated Fund for additional expenditure National Sports Institute Act 2011 [DR.3/2011] 17/3/2011 for the service of the year 2010 and to appropriate that sum for certain purposes Supplementary Supply (2010) Act 2011 [DR.6/2011] 31/3/2011 for that year. w.e.f.:- 3.6.2011 PRINCIPAL ACTS 2007 ACT AMENDING ACTS 2010 TITLE NO: ACT TITLE ACT 663 BUILDING AND COMMON PROPERTY (MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT) ACT 2007 NO: An Act to provide for the proper maintenance and management of buildings and common property, and for matters incidental thereto. ACT HIRE-PURCHASE (AMENDMENT) ACT 2010 Notes:- This Act shall apply only to Peninsular Malaysia and the Federal Territory A1384 Notes : - Amends long title, ss.4A, 4B, 5, 16, 31, 36, 38, 45, 46, 50, 51, 51B, 53, 55, of Labuan. 55A, 56, 57. w.e.f.:- 12.4.2007 - Johore [P.U.(B) 137/2007], Kedah [P.U.(B) 138/2007], Kelantan - Inserts new ss.4E,4F,4G,17A,17B,30A,50A,50B,51C,51D,51E,55B,55C,56B. [P.U.(B) 139/2007], Malacca [P.U.(B) 140/2007], Negeri Sembilan [P.U.(B) 141/2007], w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 – [P.U.(B) 307/2011] Pahang [P.U.(B) 142/2007], Penang [P.U.(B) 143/2007], Perak [P.U.(B) 144/2007], Perlis [P.U.(B) 145/2007], Terengganu [P.U.(B) 146/2007], Selangor [P.U.(B) 147/2007], Federal Territory Kuala Lumpur and Federal Territory of Putrajaya [P.U.(B) 151/2007] AMENDING ACTS 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 – Federal Territory of Labuan [P.U.(B) 145/2011] ACT TITLE NO:
PRINCIPAL ACTS 2009 ACT MONEYLENDERS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 ACT A1390 Notes:- General Amendment:- Substitutes for the words “holder of the licence” TITLE wherever they appear, with the words “licensee”. NO: - Amends ss.1, 2, 2A, 4, 4A, 5, 5F, 6, 8, 9A, 9F, 9H, 10B, 10D, 10E, 10F, 10G, 10H, ACT 700 ENFORCEMENT AGENCY INTEGRITY COMMISSION ACT 2009 10J,10K, 10P, 11, 11A, 16, 17, 17A, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 29A, 29B, 29F, 29H, Sch.1 An Act to provide for the establishment of the Enforcement Agency Integrity - Inserts new ss.9H, 10GA, 10GB, 10OA, 10OB, 10OC, 27A, 27B, 29AA, 29I, 29J, 29K, Commission and to provide for its functions and powers and for other matters Sch.1A connected therewith. - Revokes Federal Territory of Labuan (Extension and Modification of the w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 – [P.U.(B) 148/2011] Moneylenders Act 1951) Order 2007 [P.U.(A) 413/2007] and States of Sabah and Sarawak (Extension and Modification of the Moneylenders Act 1951) Order 2007 [P.U.(A) 414/2007]. PRINCIPAL ACTS 2010 w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 – [P.U.(B) 174/2011] ACT ACT MERCHANT SHIPPING (AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION) ACT 2011 TITLE A1393 Notes: - Amends ss.300, 306C, 306B, 306CA, 306D, 306G, 306I, 306J, 306JA, 306Q, Part NO: IX (ss.358-365A), 366, 381, 405, 423, 425, 426, 452, 455, 458, 460, 462, 465, 469, 470, ACT 718 AGENSI INOVASI MALAYSIA ACT 2010 471, 474, 483B, 484, 486, 487, 491C, 493, 512A, 493, 516 An Act to incorporate the Agensi Inovasi Malaysia, to stimulate and develop the - Inserts new s.381A, Sch.16 innovation eco-system in Malaysia towards achieving Vision 2020, and to provide - Deletes subheading in Part XIV (“Limitation of Time for Proceedings”), s.497 for matters connected and incidental thereto. The provisions of Parts III, IV, VI, VIII, IX and X of the Ordinance are extended to the w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 – [P.U.(B) 175/2011] States of Sabah and Sarawak. - Repeals Part III of the Merchant Shipping (Implementation of Conventions relating to Carriage of Goods by Sea and to Liability of Shipowners and Others)Regulations 1960 of Sarawak [G.N. S 240/1960] PRINCIPAL ACTS 2011 w.e.f.:- Not yet in force ACT TITLE ACT MERCHANT SHIPPING (OIL POLLUTION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 NO: A1394 Notes: - Amends long title by inserting after the word “oil” the words “and bunker oil”, short title (substitutes for the short title “Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) ACT 723 PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 Act 1994” with the short title “Merchant Shipping (Liability and Compensation for An Act to control prices of goods and charges for services and to prohibit Oil and Bunker Oil Pollution) Act 1994.”), ss.2, (heading to Part II), 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, profiteering and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 26, 29 & Sch.2 Notes:- Repeals the Price Control Act 1946 [Act 121] - Inserts new ss.3A, 5A, 6A, 11A, 28A, w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 – [P.U.(B) 146/2011] w.e.f.:- Not yet in force ACT 725 RENEWABLE ENERGY ACT 2011 An Act to provide for the establishment and implementation of a special tariff ACT ARBITRATION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 system to catalyse the generation of renewable energy and to provide for related A1395 Notes: - Amends ss.2, 8, 10, 11, 30, 38, 39, 42 & 51 matters. w.e.f.:- Not yet in force w.e.f.:- Not yet in force
84 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 95/2011 LATEST INDEX TO P.U.(A) SERIES 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.6) ORDER 2011 [P.U.(A) 89/2011 - P.U.(A) 194/2011] Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 As At 20 June 2011 w.e.f.:- 24.3.2011 – 6.4.2011 Title P.U.(A) NO. CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 107/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.7) ORDER 2011 ACCOUNTANTS ACT 1967 [ACT 94] 161/2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 ACCOUNTANTS (AMENDMENT OF FIRST SCHEDULE) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 7.4.2011 – 20.4.2011 Issued under s.14(7), Accountants Act 1967 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 144/2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, Accountants Act 1967 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.8) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 13.5.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ANTI-TERRORISM FINANCING ACT 2001 [ACT 153/2011 w.e.f.:- 21.4.2011-4.5.2011 613] CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 165/2011 ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ANTI-TERRORISM FINANCING (AMENDMENT OF CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.10) ORDER 2011 SECOND SCHEDULE) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.85, Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 w.e.f.:- 19.5.2011-1.6.2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.2, Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001. CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 181/2011 w.e.f.:- 4.5.2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.11) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 ARCHITECTS ACT 1967 [ACT 117] 180/2011 w.e.f.:- 2.6.2011-15.6.2011 ARCHITECTS (AMENDMENT) RULES 2011 Issued under s.35, Architects Act 1967 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 194/2011 Notes:- General Amendment:- CUSTOMS (VALUES) (CRUDE PETROLEUM OIL) (NO.12) ORDER 2011 - Substitutes for the words “registered Building Draughtsman” and Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 “REGISTERED BUILDING DRAUGHTSMAN” wherever appearing the words w.e.f.:- 16.6.2011-29.6.2011 “Building Draughtsman” and “BUILDING DRAUGHTSMAN”, respectively. CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 104/2011 - Substitutes for the words “registered Building Draughtsmen” and CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM KERNEL) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 “REGISTERED BUILDING DRAUGHTSMEN” wherever appearing the words Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 “Building Draughtsmen” and “BUILDING DRAUGHTSMEN”, respectively; and w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 – 30.4.2011 - Substitutes for the words “registered Architects” wherever appearing the words “GraduateArchitect”. CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 179/2011 - Amends rules 2, 11, 17, 20, 21, 22, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, Sch.1, Sch.2, Sch.3, Sch.4 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM KERNEL) (NO.6) ORDER 2011 - Inserts new Part VA (ss.32B-32E), [P.U.(A) 379/1996] Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 1.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.6.2011-30.6.2011 CAPITAL MARKETS AND SERVICES ACT 2007 [ACT 671] 149/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 93/2011 CAPITAL MARKETS AND SERVICES (FEES) REGULATIONS 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.12) ORDER 2011 CORRIGENDUM Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Corrigendum to [P.U.(A) 88/2011] w.e.f.:- 21.3.2011 – 27.3.2011 CIVIL AVIATION ACT 1969 [ACT 3] 99/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 98/2011 CIVIL AVIATION (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.13) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.3, Civil Aviation Act 1969. Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Amends reg.76, [P.U.(A) 139/1996]. w.e.f.:- 28.3.2011 – 3.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 30.3.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 105/2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 91/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.14) ORDER 2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (CHICKEN) (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.5A, Control of Supplies Act 1961. w.e.f.:- 4.4.2011 – 10.4.2011 Notes:- The retailer is exempted from having to comply with regulation 3 of the CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 108/2011 Control of Supplies (Chicken) Regulations 1996 [P.U.(A) 18/1996]. CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.15) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.7.2010 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 171/2011 w.e.f.:- 11.4.2011 – 17.4.2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (CONTROLLED ARTICLES) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 141/2011 Issued under s.5, Control of Supplies Act 1961 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.16) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 25.5.2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 89/2011 w.e.f.:- 18.4.2011 – 24.4.2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 145/2011 Issued under s.5A, Control of Supplies Act 1961. CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.17) ORDER 2011 Notes:- The retailer who deals in the scheduled articles items 8 and 9 specified Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 in Part I of the Schedule is exempted from having to comply with regulation 3 of w.e.f.:- 25.4.2011-1.5.2011 the Control of Supplies Regulations 1974 [P.U.(A) 103/1974] w.e.f.:- 15.7.2010 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 157/2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES ACT 1961 [ACT 122] 90/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.19) ORDER 2011 CONTROL OF SUPPLIES (EXEMPTION) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.5A, Control of Supplies Act 1961. w.e.f.:- 9.5.2011-15.5.2011 Notes:- The retailer who deals in the scheduled articles item for wheat flour, CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 163/2011 sugar and cooking oil specified in Part I of the Schedule is exempted from having CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.20) ORDER 2011 to comply with paragraph 4(5)(b) of the Control of Supplies Regulations 1974 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 [P.U.(A) 103/1974] w.e.f.:- 16.5.2011-22.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2010 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 169/2011 CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1993 [ACT 502] 110/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.21) ORDER 2011 CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (ASSUMPTION OF CONTROL) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.69(2), Co-operative Societies Act 1993 w.e.f.:- 23.5.2011-29.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 until the period of not exceeding two years. COUNTERVAILING AND ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ACT 1993 [ACT 504] 142/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 176/2011 CUSTOMS (ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.22) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.25, Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties Act 1993 Issued under s12, Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 21.4.2011 - 20.4.2016 w.e.f.:- 30.5.2011-5.6.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 154/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 185/2011 CUSTOMS (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS (NO.2) 2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.23) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.142, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Notes:- Amends reg.3 and Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 162/1977] w.e.f.:- 6.6.2011-12.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 5.5.2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 191/2011 CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 142/2011 CUSTOMS (VALUES) (PALM OIL) (NO.24) ORDER 2011 CUSTOMS (ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.12, Customs Act 1967 Issued under s.11(1), Customs Act 1967 w.e.f.:- 13.6.2011-19.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 21.4.2011-20.4.2016
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 85 Bar Updates/Notices
CUSTOMS ACT 1967 [ACT 235] 183/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 123/2011 CUSTOMS DUTIES (GOODS UNDER THE EARLY HARVEST PROGRAMME AND THE FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION (BUTTERWORTH-KULIM EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 BETWEEN ASEAN AND CHINA) (AMENDMENT) 2010 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 CORRIGENDUM Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 327/2008] Notes:- Corrigendum to [P.U.(A) 434/2010] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 ELECTIONS ACT 1958 [ACT 19] 193/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 128/2011 ELECTIONS (CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) Issued under s.16, Elections Act 1958 (BUTTERWORTH OUTER RING ROAD) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER Notes:- Amends reg.2, 4, 11, 13, 15, 17, 23A, 24, 25, 25A, 30, Sch.1, Sch.2 and Sch.3 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 335/2008] EMPLOYMENT ACT 1955 [ACT 265] 92/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 EMPLOYMENT (TERMINATION AND LAY-OFF BENEFITS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 131/2011 Issued under s.60J, Employment Act 1955 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (CHERAS- Notes:- Inserts new reg.1A, [P.U.(A) 338/1983] KAJANG HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 338/2008] FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 168/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO OPTIMAL CHEMICAL (M) SDN. FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 129/2011 BHD., KERTEH, TERENGGANU) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 (DAMANSARA-PUCHONG HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER w.e.f.:- 21.5.2011 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FACTORIES AND MACHINERY ACT 1967 [ACT 139] 156/2011 Notes:- Amends para.1(2), [P.U.(A) 336/2008] FACTORIES AND MACHINERY (EXEMPTION TO PETRONAS GAS BERHAD, w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 SEGAMAT COMPRESSOR STATION, SEGAMAT REGIONAL OPERATION, JOHOR) FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 133/2011 ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (DUTA-ULU Issued under s.55(3), Factories and Machinery Act 1967 KELANG EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 7.5.2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEES ACT 1951 [ACT 209] 172/2011 Notes:- Amends sch.1, [P.U.(A) 51/2009] FEES (EMPLOYMENT PASS, VISIT PASS (TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT) AND WORK w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 PASS) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 126/2011 Issued under s.3, Fees Act 1951 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (EAST Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 479/1998] COAST EXPRESSWAY-PHASE 1) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.6.2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEES ACT 1951 [ACT 209] 151/2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 332/2008] FEES (PASSPORTS AND VISAS) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Issued under s.3, Fees Act 1951 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 118/2011 Notes:- Amends para.2, [P.U.(A) 189/1967] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (EAST-WEST w.e.f.:- 1.5.2011 LINK EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 188/2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 322/2008] FEDERAL ROADS (SENAI-PASIR GUDANG-DESARU EXPRESSWAY) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2011 Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 Notes:- Revokes the Federal Roads (Senai-Pasir Gudang-Desaru Expressway) FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 138/2011 Order 2009 [P.U.(A) 328/2009] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (FEDERAL w.e.f.:- 10.6.2011 HIGHWAY ROUTE 2) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 96/2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 330/2008] FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.4) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 115/2011 w.e.f.:- 25.3.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (GUTHRIE CORRIDOR EXPRESSWAY) (NO.2) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 164/2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.5) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 319/2008] Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 137/2011 w.e.f.:- 20.5.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (IPOH FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 177/2011 SELATAN-JALAN DUTA-BUKIT RAJA EXPRESSWAY, NORTH SOUTH EXPRESSWAY FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.6) ORDER 2011 CENTRAL LINK AND KUALA LUMPUR-JOHORE BAHRU EXPRESSWAY) Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 w.e.f.:- 31.5.2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 340/2008] FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 182/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.7) ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 140/2011 Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (JITRA- Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] SUNGAI DUA (BUTTERWORTH) EXPRESSWAY] (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) w.e.f.:- 7.6.2011 ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 186/2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.8) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 333/2008] Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 139/2011 w.e.f.:- 13.6.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (JURU FEDERAL ROADS ACT 1959 [ACT 376] 190/2011 (BUTTERWORTH)-JELAPANG (IPOH) EXPRESSWAY] (AMENDMENT) (NO.3) FEDERAL ROADS (WEST MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) (NO.9) ORDER 2011 (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.3, Federal Roads Act 1959 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 401/1989] Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 333/2008] w.e.f.:- 13.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 120/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 135/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (AMPANG- FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KAJANG- KUALA LUMPUR ELEVATED HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER SEREMBAN HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends sch.1, [P.U.(A) 61/2010] Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 324/2008] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010
86 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 121/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 125/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KAJANG FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (WESTERN TRAFFIC DISPERSAL RING ROAD) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 KUALA LUMPUR TRAFFIC DISPERSAL SCHEME HIGHWAY-PENCHALA LINK) Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 325/2008] Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 329/2008] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 136/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KEMUNING- FEDERAL TERRITORY (PLANNING) ACT 1982 [ACT 267] 101/2011 SHAH ALAM HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT) (AMENDMENT) RULES 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Issued under s.64, Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 163/2010] Notes:- Amends rule 5, [P.U.(A) 7/1971] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 FOOD ACT 1983 [ACT 281] 102/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 116/2011 APPROVED LABORATORY ORDER 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KUALA Issued under s.3A(1), Food Act 1983 LUMPUR-KARAK HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Notes:- The minister approves the Laboratory of Food Processing and Postharvest Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Technology II, Faculty of Food Science and Technology, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 320/2008] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Serdang, Selangor as approved Laboratory for the purposes of the Act. w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 112/2011 FOOD ACT 1983 [ACT 281] 100/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KUALA CONTROL OF TOBACCO PRODUCT (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 LUMPUR-PUTRAJAYA HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.36, Food Act 1983 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends reg.8A, Sch.9, [P.U.(A) 324/2004] Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 316/2008] w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 FOOD ACT 1983 [ACT 281] 143/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 119/2011 FOOD IRRADIATION REGULATIONS 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (KUALA Issued under s.34, Food Act 1983 LUMPUR-SEREMBAN HIGHWAY AND SALAK HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) w.e.f.:- Not yet in force (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 HIRE-PURCHASE ACT 1967 [ACT 212] 192/2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 HIRE-PURCHASE (APPLICATION OF PERMIT AND PROCEDURE OF REPOSSESSION) Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 323/2008] REGULATIONS 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Issued under s.57(2)(b), Hire-Purchase Act 1967 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 127/2011 Notes:- Revokes the Hire-Purchase (Recovery of Possession and Maintenance of FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (NEW Records by Owners) Regulations 1976 [P.U.(A) 1/1977] NORTH KLANG STRAITS BYPASS EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 ORDER 2011 IMMIGRATION ACT 1959/63 [ACT 155] 103/2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 IMMIGRATION (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2011 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 334/2008] Issued under s.54, Immigration Act 1959/63 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Notes:- Amends reg.1, 8, Sch.2, Sch.3 and inserts new reg.16A, [L.N. 228/1963] FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 114/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (NEW IMMIGRATION ACT 1959/63 [ACT 155] 94/2011 PANTAI HIGHWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 IMMIGRATION (ENTRY PERMIT FEES) (EXEMPTION) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Issued under s.55, Immigration Act 1959/63 and reg.34(2), Immigration Regulations Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 318/2008] 1963 [LN. 228/1963] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 w.e.f.:- 25.3.2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 132/2011 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 162/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (NORTH DOUBLE TAXATION RELIEF (THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN) SOUTH EXPRESSWAY CENTRAL LINK AND KLIA EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 (NO.2) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.132(1), Income Tax Act 1967 and s.65A(1), Petroleum (Income Tax) Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Act 1967. Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 339/2008] w.e.f.:- 14.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 158/2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 130/2011 INCOME TAX (DEDUCTION FOR CONTRIBUTION TO UNIVERSAL SERVICE FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (PENANG PROVISION FUND) RULES 2011 BRIDGE) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under ss.154(1)(b) and 33(1)(d), Income Tax Act 1967 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 w.e.f.:- y/a 2002- Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 337/2008] INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 167/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 INCOME TAX (DEDUCTION FOR INVESTMENT IN AN APPROVED FOOD PRODUCTION PROJECT) RULES 2011 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 134/2011 Issued under s.154(1)(b), Income Tax Act 1967. FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (SENAI- w.e.f.:- 1.10.2005 PASIR GUDANG-DESARU EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 160/2011 Notes:- Amends sch.1, [P.U.(A) 364/2009] INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Issued under s.127(3)(b), Income Tax Act 1967 Notes:- Exempts an individual, unit trust or listed close-end fund in the basis FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 122/2011 period for a year of assessment from the payment of income tax in respect of FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (SEREMBAN- any gains or profits received from the investment in Islamic securities other PORT DICKSON EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 than convertible loan stock, which are issued in accordance with the principles Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 of Mudharabah, Musyarakah, Ijarah, Istisna’ or any other principle approved by Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 326/2008] the Shariah Advisory Council established by the Securities Commission under the w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 [Act 671]. FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 117/2011 w.e.f.:- y/a 2007 until y/a 2009 FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (SHAH INCOME TAX ACT 1967 [ACT 53] 166/2011 ALAM EXPRESSWAY) (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) (NO.3) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Issued under s.127(3)(b), Income Tax Act 1967 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 321/2008] Notes:- The Minister exempts a qualified person resident in Malaysia from the w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 payment of income tax in relation to- FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 113/2011 (a) a new project for a period of ten consecutive years of assessment in respect of FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (SUNGAI its statutory income commencing from the first year of assessment in which the BESI HIGHWAY) AMENDMENT) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 qualified person derived statutory income in relation to that project; or Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 (b) an expansion project for a period of five consecutive years of assessment Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 317/2008] in respect of the statutory income from its existing and expansion projects, w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 commencing from the first year of assessment in which the qualified person FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) ACT 1984 [ACT 306] 124/2011 derived statutory income in relation to the existing and expansion projects, and FEDERAL ROADS (PRIVATE MANAGEMENT) (COLLECTION OF TOLLS) (WESTERN the first year of assessment shall not be earlier than the year of assessment in the KUALA LUMPUR TRAFFIC DISPERSAL SCHEME HIGHWAY-KERINCHI LINK AND basis period in which the date of approval from the Minister falls. DAMANSARA LINK) (AMENDMENT) (NO.3) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.10.2005 Issued under s.2, Federal Roads (Private Management) Act 1984 Notes:- Amends para.1, [P.U.(A) 88/2009] w.e.f.:- 15.9.2010 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 87 Bar Updates/Notices
LABUAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY ACT 1996 [ACT 545] 152/2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 148/2011 LABUAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (ANNUAL FEE FOR CO-LOCATION ROAD TRANSPORT (PROHIBITION OF USE OF ROAD) (FEDERAL ROADS) ROUTE OFFICE) (LABUAN INSURANCE AND TAKAFUL LICENSEE) (ORDER) 2011 3 (KUALA TERENGGANU-KOTA BHARU ROAD), ROUTE 174 (SULTAN MAHMUD Issued under s.32(A), Labuan Financial Services Authority Act 1996 ROAD) AND ROUTE 65 (SULTAN MIZAN ROAD) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.5.2011 Issued under s.70(1),(1A) and (2), Road Transport Act 1987 LEMBAGA PEMBANGUNAN INDUSTRI PEMBINAAN MALAYSIA ACT 1994 97/2011 w.e.f.:- 27.4.2011 [ACT 520] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY (COLLECTION OF LEVY) (AMENDMENT) ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 111/2011 REGULATIONS 2011 ROAD TRANSPORT (STAND FOR BUS) (FEDERAL TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR) Issued under s.37(2)(b), Lembaga Pembangunan Industri Pembinaan Malaysia Act 1994. (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 287/1996] - General Amendment: substitutes Issued under s.72, Road Transport Act 1987. for the words “Form CIDB L1/96” wherever appearing in these Regulations the w.e.f.:- 14.4.2011 words “Form CIDB L1/2011 (Amendment 1/2011)”. w.e.f.:- 25.3.2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 146/2011 LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) ACT 1965 [ACT 96] 155/2011 ROAD TRANSPORT (STANDS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES) (FEDERAL LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) (REMISSION OF TAX AND STAMP TERRITORY OF KUALA LUMPUR) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 DUTY) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.72, Road Transport Act 1987 Issued under s.10(1), Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) Act 1965 w.e.f.:- 25.4.2011 Notes:- Remits any tax payable under the Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] in full STRATEGIC TRADE ACT 2010 [ACT 708] 150/2011 in respect of the Facility Agreement to be made between Jambatan Kedua Sdn. STRATEGIC TRADE (RESTRICTED END-USERS AND PROHIBITED END-USERS) Bhd. (the “Borrower”) and AmIslamic Bank Berhad (the “Lender”) in relation (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 to the provision of a term loan facility (the “Facility”) of up to the aggregate Issued under s.8, Strategic Trade Act 2010 amount of six hundred million ringgit (RM600,000,000.00) to the Borrower. Notes:- Amends Sch.1, [P.U.(A) 484/2010] w.e.f.:- 5.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.5.2011 LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) ACT 1965 [ACT 96] 178/2011 LOANS GUARANTEE (BODIES CORPORATE) (REMISSION OF TAX AND STAMP WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT 1952 [ACT 273] 106/2011 DUTY) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION (FOREIGN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SCHEME) Issued under s.10(1), Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) Act 1965 (INSURANCE) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 15.12.2010 Issued under s.26(2), Workmen’s Compensation Act 1952 Notes:- Amends Sch, [P.U.(A) 45/2005] MINISTERIAL FUNCTIONS ACT 1969 [ACT 2] 184/2011 w.e.f.:- 7.4.2011 MINISTERS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (AMENDMENT) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.2, Ministerial Functions Act 1969 Notes:- Amends Sch, [P.U.(A) 222/2009] w.e.f.:- 19.4.2011 LATEST INDEX TO SELECTED PESTICIDES ACT 1974 [ACT 149] 187/2011 P.U.(B) SERIES 2011 PESTICIDES (LICENSING FOR MANUFACTURING) RULES 2011 Issued under s.57(1), Pesticides Act 1974 As at 20 June 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.7.2011 P.U.(B) PETROLEUM (INCOME TAX) ACT 1967 [ACT 543] 162/2011 Title NO. DOUBLE TAXATION RELIEF (THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN) AGENSI INOVASI MALAYSIA ACT 2010 [ACT 718] 175/2011 (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Issued under s.65A(1), Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 and s.132(1), Income Tax Act 1967 Notes:- 15 April 2011 appointed as the date on which the [Act 718] comes into w.e.f.:- 14.5.2011 operation. POISONS ACT 1952 [ACT 366] 109/2011 w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 POISONS (AMENDMENT OF POISONS LIST) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 Issued under s.6, Poisons Act 1952 BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT 1989 [ACT 372] 132/2011 Notes:- Amends Sch.1, Poisons Act 1952 NOTICE UNDER SUBSECTION 18(1) w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 Notes:- List of licensed institutions as at 14 February 2011. w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 PORT AUTHORITIES ACT 1963 [ACT 488] 175/2011 JOHOR PORT AUTHORITY (SCALE OF CHARGES) BY-LAWS 2011 BUILDING AND COMMON PROPERTY (MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT) ACT 145/2011 Issued under ss.16 and 29, Port Authorities Act 1963 2007 [ACT 663] w.e.f.:- 23.8.2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 [ACT 723] 159/2011 Notes:- 1 April 2011 appointed as the date on which the [A ct 663] comes into PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING (FIXING OF MAXIMUM PRICE) ORDER 2011 operation in the Federal Territory of Labuan. Issued under s.4, Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 Notes:- Revokes the Price Control (Fixing of Maximum Price) (No.7) Order 2010 [P.U.(A) 401/2010] CARE CENTRES ACT 1993 [ACT 506] 248/2011 w.e.f.:- 10.5.2011 EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 23 PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 [ACT 723] 173/2011 Notes:- Anjung Singgah at Bangunan Ehsan. No.28-32, Jalan Hang Lekiu, 55100 PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING (FIXING OF MAXIMUM PRICE AND Kuala Lumpur, administered by Yayasan Kebajikan Negara exempted from all PRICE MARKING OF PRICE-CONTROLLED GOODS) ORDER 2011 the provisions of the Act. Issued under ss.4 and 10, Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 w.e.f.:- 9.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 25.5.2011-31.5.2011 COMMISSIONS OF ENQUIRY ACT 1950 [ACT 119] 210/2011 PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 [ACT 723] 174/2011 COMMISSION TO ENQUIRE INTO THE DEATH OF TEOH BENG HOCK ENLARGEMENT PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING (FIXING OF MAXIMUM PRICE AND OF TIME PRICE MARKING OF PRICE-CONTROLLED GOODS) (NO.2) ORDER 2011 w.e.f.:- 1.2.2011 Issued under ss.4 and 10, Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 w.e.f.:- 27.5.2011-2.6.2011 COUNTERVAILING AND ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ACT 1993 [ACT 504] 180/2011 NOTICE OF FINAL NEGATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DETERMINATION OF PRIVATE HEALTHCARE FACILITIES AND SERVICES ACT 1998 [ACT 586] 170/2011 THE ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES WITH REGARD TO IMPORTS OF POLYETHYLENE PRIVATE HEALTHCARE FACILITIES AND SERVICES (COMPOUNDABLE OFFENCES) TEREPHTHALATE ORIGINATING IN OR EXPORTED FROM CHINESE TAIPEI, REPUBLIC REGULATIONS 2011 OF INDONESIA AND REPUBLIC OF KOREA Issued under s.107(1), Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998 w.e.f.:- 19.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.8.2011 COUNTERVAILING AND ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ACT 1993 [ACT 504] 179/2011 REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS ACT 1951 [ACT 371] 147/2011 NOTICE OF FINAL AFFIRMATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DETERMINATION OF REGISTRATION OF PHARMACISTS (AMENDMENT OF SECOND SCHEDULE) ORDER 2011 THE ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES WITH REGARD TO IMPORTS OF POLYETHYLENE Issued under s.6A(5), Registration of Pharmacists Act 1951 TEREPHTHALATE ORIGINATING IN OR EXPORTED FROM THAILAND Notes:- Amends Sch.2, Registration of Pharmacists Act 1951 w.e.f.:- 19.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 27.4.2011 ROAD TRANSPORT ACT 1987 [ACT 333] 189/2011 ENFORCEMENT AGENCY INTEGRITY COMMISSION ACT 2009 [ACT 700] 148/2011 NATIONAL SPEED LIMIT (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2011 APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Issued under s.69(1), Road Transport Act 1987 Notes:- 1 April 2011 appointed as the date on which the [Act 700] comes into Notes:- Amends Sch, [P.U.(A) 18/1989] operation. w.e.f.:- 10.6.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011
88 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
FOOD ACT 1983 [ACT 281] 306/2011 MENTAL HEALTH ACT 2001 [ACT 615] 287/2011 CONTROL OF TOBACCO PRODUCT REGULATIONS 2004 [P.U.(A) 324/2004] NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNMENT PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL DECLARATION OF NON-SMOKING AREA 2011 Notes:- The whole or any part of Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Notes:- The buildings and places specified in the First and Second Schedules Kuala Lumpur appointed as government psychiatric hospital for the admission, declared as non-smoking areas. detention, lodging, care, treatment, rehabilitation, control and protection of This Declaration does not apply to- persons who are mentally disordered. a) any building or premises, which are used as private residential homes, located w.e.f.:- 15.6.2010 in the areas specified in the First and Second Schedules; and MONEYLENDERS (AMENDMENT) ACT 2011 [ACT A1390] 174/2011 b) any road located in the areas specified in the First Schedule. APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 Notes:- 15 April 2011 appointed as the date on which the [Act A1390] comes HIRE-PURCHASE (AMENDMENT) ACT 2010 [ACT A1384] 307/2011 into operation. APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION w.e.f.:- 15.4.2011 Notes:- 15 June 2011 appointed as the date on which the Act A1384 comes into PRICE CONTROL AND ANTI-PROFITEERING ACT 2011 [ACT 723] 146/2011 operation. APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 Notes:- 1 April 2011 appointed as the date on which the [Act 723] comes into HOLIDAYS ACT 1951 [ACT 369] 261/2011 operation. NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 8 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 Notes:- The following day are appointed as a public holiday in Peninsular Malaysia PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 131/2011 in addition to the days mentioned in the First Schedule of the Act: APPOINTMENT OF LOCK-UP TO BE A PLACE OF CONFINEMENT a) 1 September 2011, if Hari Raya Puasa falls on 30 August 2011; or Notes:- The lock-up in the Travers Police Station, Kuala Lumpur to be place for the b) 2 September 2011, if Hari Raya Puasa falls on 31 August 2011. confinement of persons remanded or sentenced to such terms of imprisonment w.e.f.:- 19.5.2011 not exceeding one month. HOLIDAYS ACT 1951 [ACT 369] 262/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 8 PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 305/2011 Notes:- The following day are appointed as a public holiday in the Federal APPOINTMENT OF LOCK-UPS TO BE PLACES OF CONFINEMENT Territory of Labuan in addition to the days mentioned in the First Schedule of Notes:- Lokap Balai Polis Dang Wangi, Kuala Lumpur, Lokap Balai Polis Anak the Act: Bukit, Alor Setar and Lokap Balai Polis Trafik, Miri, Sarawak to be places for the a) 1 September 2011, if Hari Raya Puasa falls on 30 August 2011; or confinement of persons remanded or sentenced to such terms of imprisonment b) 2 September 2011, if Hari Raya Puasa falls on 31 August 2011. not exceeding one month. w.e.f.:- 19.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 15.6.2011 IMMIGRATION ACT 1959/63 [ACT 155] 101/2011 PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 108/2011 PRESCRIPTION OF APPROVED ROUTES AND DECLARATION OF IMMIGRATION DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 3 CONTROL POSTS, LANDING PLACES, AIRPORTS AND POINTS OF ENTRY Notes:- Building of Block A,B,C,D and E that are surrounded by chain-link fences (AMENDMENT) 2011 situated on Lot P.T. 1909 Kem Mahkota, Kluang, Johor and designated as “Pusat Notes:- Amends Sch, [P.U.(B) 136/1993] Pemulihan Pemasyarakatan Kem Mahkota, Kluang, Johor”, to be a prison for w.e.f.:- 11.3.2011 the purposes of the Act for the imprisonment or detention of persons lawfully INSURANCE ACT 1996 [ACT 553] 147/2011 in custody. LIST OF LICENSED INSURERS w.e.f.:- 20.3.2011 Notes:- List of licensed insurers as at 14 February 2011. PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 177/2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 3 Notes:- All buildings situated on, and the area measuring 40.4739 hectares on Lot INSURANCE ACT 1996 [ACT 553] 284/2011 P.T. 1616, Mukim Padang Siding, District of Perlis, State of Perlis and designated REVOCATION OF GENERAL INSURANCE LICENCE as ‘Perlis Correctional Centre’ to be a prison for the purposes of the Act for the Notes:- Revokes the licence of BH Insurance (M) Berhad to carry on general imprisonment or detention of persons lawfully in custody. insurance business. w.e.f.:- 14.4.2011 w.e.f.:- 14.2.2011 PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 247/2011 INSURANCE ACT 1996 [ACT 553] 283/2011 DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 3 REVOCATION OF LIFE INSURANCE LICENCE Notes:- Building of Block A,B,C,D,E,F,G, H and I that are surrounded by chain- Notes:- Revokes the licence of Mayban Life Assurance Berhad to carry on life link fences situated on Lot PT 1699, Mukim Gemas, District of Tampin, Negeri insurance business. Sembilan and designated as “Pusat Pemulihan Pemasyarakatan Kem Syed w.e.f.:- 15.12.2010 Sirajuddin, Gemas, Negeri Sembilan”, to be a prison for the purposes of the Act for the imprisonment or detention of persons lawfully in custody. INSURANCE ACT 1996 [ACT 553] 285/2011 w.e.f.:- 30.4.2011 REVOCATION OF LIFE AND GENERAL INSURANCE LICENCE Notes:- Revokes the licence of Hong Leong Assurance Berhad to carry on life and PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 258/2011 general insurance business. DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 3 w.e.f.:- 14.2.2011 Notes:- Building of Block A,B,C,D and E that are surrounded by chain-link fences situated on Lot PT 2020 Mukim Kuala Kuantan, District of Kuantan, Pahang ISLAMIC BANKING ACT 1983 [ACT 276] 256/2011 and designated as “Pusat Pemulihan Pemasyarakatan Kem Batu 10, Kuantan, ISLAMIC BANK TO WHICH LICENCE HAS BEEN ISSUED Pahang”, to be a prison for the purposes of the Act for the imprisonment or Notes:- List of Islamic banks to which licences have been issued under the Act as detention of persons lawfully in custody. at 16 February 2011. w.e.f.:- 15.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 16.2.2011 PRISON ACT 1995 [ACT 537] 259/2011 LABUAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AND SECURITIES ACT 2010 [ACT 704] 167/2011 DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 3 LIST OF INSURANCE LICENSEES Notes:- Building of Block A,B,C,D and E that are surrounded by chain-link fences Notes:- List of insurance licensees whose licenses are valid as at 31 December 2010. situated on Lot PT 4698 Kem Battalion Infantry, Tanah Merah, Alor Setar, Kedah w.e.f.:- 8.4.2011 and designated as “Pusat Pemulihan Pemasyarakatan Kem Tok Jalai, Alor Setar, Kedah”, to be a prison for the purposes of the Act for the imprisonment or LABUAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AND SECURITIES ACT 2010 [ACT 704] 168/2011 detention of persons lawfully in custody. LIST OF LICENSEES w.e.f.:- 15.5.2011 Notes:- List of Labuan banks and Labuan investment banks licensees whose licenses are valid as at 31 December 2010. SAFEGUARDS ACT 2006 [ACT 657] 250/2011 w.e.f.:- 12.4.2011 NOTICE OF INITIATION OF SAFEGUARD MEASURE WITH REGARD TO IMPORTS OF HOT ROLLED COILS IMPORTED INTO MALAYSIA LEMBAGA KEMAJUAN WILAYAH KEDAH ACT 1981 [ACT 249] 176/2011 w.e.f.:- 30.4.2011 NOTIFICATION OF EXTENSION OF ENFORCEMENT PERIOD Notes:- The State Government of Kedah and the Federal Government agree to TAKAFUL ACT 1984 [ACT 312] 286/2011 extend the enforcement of the said Act for a period of nine years with effect NOTICE OF REGISTRATION UNDER SUBSECTION 8(8) from 29 May 2011. Notes:- ING PUBLIC Takaful Ehsan Berhad w.e.f.:- 29.5.2011 w.e.f.:- 1.4.2011 MALAYSIAN TIMBER INDUSTRY BOARD (INCORPORATION) (AMENDMENT) ACT 104/2011 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1976 [ACT 172] 263/2011 2010 [ACT A1387] NOTIFICATION UNDER SUBSECTION 15(4) APPOINTMENT OF DATE OF COMING INTO OPERATION Notes:- Perbadanan Putrajaya as the Local Planning Authority has adopted the Notes:- 15 March 2011 appointed as the date on which the [Act A1387] comes Local Plan and the Local Plan together with the marking by which it may be into operation. identified is shown on the Local Plan map in the Schedule. w.e.f.:- 15.3.2011 w.e.f.:- 9.11.2010
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 89 Bar Updates/Notices
NEW BOOKS Chew, Kherk Ying. Malaysia intellectual property law: copyright. Malaysian Court Practice: 2011 Desk Edition: Appellate Court Practice. Kuala Lumpur: CCH, 2009. Petaling Jaya: LexisNexis, 2011. Chew, Kherk Ying. Malaysia intellectual property law: trade marks. Malaysian Court Practice: 2011 Desk Edition: High Court Practice Kuala Lumpur: CCH, 2009. Volumes I, II & III. Petaling Jaya: LexisNexis, 2011. Chew, Margaret. Minority shareholders’ rights and remedies. 2nd Malaysian Court Practice: 2011 Desk Edition: Subordinate Court ed. Singapore: LexisNexis, 2007. Practice. Petaling Jaya: LexisNexis, 2011. Citator - I: Cases reported: cases reported of the Supreme Court of Malaysian Employers Federation. Leave & absenteeism in employment: India 2001-2006. New Delhi: LexisNexis, 2007. cases, commentary & materials. Petaling Jaya, Selangor: Malaysian Citator - II: Cases judicially considered: cases judicially considered by Employers Federation, 2006. the Supreme Court of India 2001 - 2006. [viii, 594 p.]. New McDougall, Ian. [Ed.]. Cases that changed our lives. London: Delhi: LexisNexis, 2007. LexisNexis, 2010. Citator - III: Cases judicially considered: cases judicially considered by Nasser Hamid. Land law in Sarawak. Petaling Jaya, Selangor: Gavel the Supreme Court of India 2001 - 2006. [viii, 595 - 1265 p.]. Publications, 2011. New Delhi: LexisNexis, 2007. Nik Safiah Karim. Tatabahasa dewan. 3rd ed. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Citator - IV: Legislations referred to: legislations referred to by the Bahasa dan Pustaka, 2011. Supreme Court of India 2001- 2006. New Delhi: LexisNexis, Pawancheek Marican. Islamic inheritance laws in Malaysia. 2nd ed. 2007. Petaling Jaya, Selangor: LexisNexis, 2008. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Kamus dewan. 4th ed. Kuala Lumpur: Tey, Tsun Hang. Trusts, trustees and equitable remedies: text and Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 2010. materials. Singapore: LexisNexis, 2010. Employment termination law & practice Malaysia. (Loose-leaf) Singapore: CCH Asia Pte Limited, 2011. NEW LAW REPORTS Rubenstein, Michael [ed.]. Industrial Relations Law Reports [IRLR]. 1972- London: LexisNexis Butterworths, 1972-
NOTICE REGARDING DOCUMENTS IN BAR COUNCIL’S CUSTODY: LEGAL FIRMS IN WHICH BAR COUNCIL HAS INTERVENED
When Bar Council intervenes in a legal firm pursuant to powers conferred by the Legal Profession Act 1976, it can take custody of documents that are within the control or possession of the firm. Subsequently, Bar Council takes steps to notify clients and/or interested parties to collect their documents within the stipulated time period. However, many documents are uncollected and remain in Bar Council’s custody, such as those taken from the legal firms listed below. Clients or interested parties who wish to claim documents that relate to cases that were handled by these legal firms are advised to contact the Bar Council’s Intervention Department at 03-2050 2050. (As at 7 June 2011)
Kuala Lumpur Messrs Zihin Shariff & Partners Messrs Tuah Hilmy & Hazudin Messrs Badri Kuhan Yeoh & Ghandi Messrs Khalid Chung & Shankar Messrs Parthan & Associates Messrs KE Ooi & Partners Messrs Nordin Hamid & Co Messrs YC Pok & Zurina Messrs Anuar SJ Ong & Co Messrs Raja Rohana & Co Messrs Ganesan Mariapan & Co Messrs Adi Azhar Messrs Abdullah-Haniff & Assoc Pahang Messrs BC Low Messrs Andrew Lee & Co Messrs Zul & Co Messrs Sooriyar & Co Selangor Johore Messrs YH Chan & Co Messrs S Letchumanan & H Nizam Messrs Baharuddin & Partners Messrs Shaik Anwar Raja Messrs Bhaarathee & Associates Messrs Rosli Rahman & Co Messrs PL Low & Co Messrs Zainal Rashid & Partners Messrs JL Lim & Co Messrs Wan Nizar Rais Messrs Jaharberdeen & Ngo Messrs Ooi Sun Nee Messrs Par Govind & Co Messrs Jauhari & Assoc Messrs Mariam & Co Messrs Hadi & Co Messrs HK Teh & Assoc Messrs KY Teo & Associates Messrs Michael Lim & Assoc Messrs Sabri Nazli Lana & Azizan Negeri Sembilan Messrs Yusuf Abdul Rahman & Co Messrs Penney Khoo Soh Ping & Co Messrs M Kuppusamy & Co Messrs Mohd Zawawi Amelda & Partners Messrs Umar Baki & Co Messrs Sasi Kumar & Assoc Messrs CK Kow & Co Messrs Cheong & Chong Messrs SF Leow Messrs Nazli Ghazali & Cheong Messrs Hassan Kuldeep & Co Messrs Azizi Nizam & Anwar Messrs Zaim Al-Amin & Assoc Messrs Khalil Samsuni & Co Perak Messrs Su How & Co Malacca Messrs Ravi Nair Maideen & Assoc Messrs MW Lian & Assoc Messrs Ang Kwee Thian & Associates Messrs Mohd Azhar & Co
90 PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 Bar Updates/Notices
DISCIPLINARY ORDERS
March–May 2011 Update on Appeals against Disciplinary Orders STRUCK OFF (1) Kasturi Kesveran (K/340) SIJIL NAME ORDER DATED Struck off the Roll by Order dated 21 May 2010. Appeal filed in June ANNUAL (to take effect 21 2010. Appeal dismissed by High Court on 14 Oct 2010. Appeal filed days from date of NO in Court of Appeal on 18 Oct 2010. Stay of Execution filed on 11 Order) Nov 2010. Stay application dismissed by Court of Appeal on 1 Dec A/349 Abdullahilhai b Hj Mohamed 30 Apr 2011 2010. Stay application filed at Federal Court on 9 Dec 2010 and was M/690 Mustaffa b Idris 20 May 2011 struck off. Appeal proper was dismissed by Court of Appeal with costs on 5 Apr 2011. SUSPENDED (2) Faisal Mohd Hanafiah (F/30) SIJIL NAME ORDER DATED Fined RM25,000 by Order dated 19 Mar 2010. Appeal filed in April ANNUAL 2010. On 25 Apr 2011, High Court dismissed the appeal and ordered NO the Appellant to bear own costs. K/261 Krishnadevan CV s/o KP Visvanathan 19 May 2011 (suspended for three months with effect 21 (3) Zulaiha bt Ahmad Sidek (Z/312) days from 19 May 2011 and to expire on 9 Sept 2011) Suspended for three years by Order dated 23 Oct 2010 and to expire on 13 Jan 2013. Appeal filed in November 2010. On 30 Mar 2011, FINED High Court dismissed the appeal and ordered that the punishment of three years suspension be reduced to two years and awarded costs of SIJIL NAME ORDER DATED FINED RM2,000 to the Respondent (ie Complainant). ANNUAL (RM) NO This list includes Disciplinary Orders issued up to 20 May A/181 Ayasamy s/o Kupusamy 25 Mar 2011 1,000 2011 wherein no notices of appeals J/216 Jegathesan Karupiah 26 Mar 2011 1,000 have been served on Bar Council. C/515 Chang Kah Ling 29 Apr 2011 3,000 P/164 Periasamy a/l Karuppan 29 Apr 2011 8,000 As at 18 July 2011 N/1054 Nur Addelene bt Mohd Nawi 30 Apr 2011 3,000 L/577 Lau Bee Gee 19 May 2011 5,000 B/33 Balwant Singh Sidhu 19 May 2011 1,000 S/213 Seah, Diana Ann 20 May 2011 2,000
REPRIMANDED
SIJIL NAME ORDER ANNUAL DATED NO R/133 Ravishankar a/l SN Gandhi 25 Mar 2011 I/89 Ismail b Mohamed Arifin 29 Apr 2011 I/231 Ismail Sabri b Mohamad 29 Apr 2011 R/77 Robiha bt Mohamed 20 May 2011 N/816 Josephine Ng Bee Leng 20 May 2011
Suspended by High Court Ng Ann Gie (N/764) – Suspended by High Court on 24 Feb 2011 pursuant to section 88A(1)(d) of the Legal Profession Act 1976.
PRAXIS JULY-SEPT 2011 91
ㅢӊኀѣളђⴕ⌋ᗁਾ֒фਇኋ儎ቸ䇰එ