PEMPETISYEN Radha Krishnan A/l Rajoo Vijaya Letchumy A/p Supacandar

PEMPETISYEN Radha Krishnan A/l Rajoo Vijaya Letchumy A/p Supacandar

Counsel for the petitioner had personally obtained sensitive confidential information from the unrepresented respondent about matters central to the divorce; that possession created an embarrassment under Rule 3(b)(i) and a real risk/appearance of unfairness such that a fair‑minded reasonable member of the public would require removal; accordingly the court ordered counsel to withdraw and allowed the recusal application.

Citation
BA-33-702-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner (husband): Radha Krishnan a/l Rajoo; Respondent (wife): Vijaya Letchumy a/p Supacandar
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 April 2024
Case Number
BA-33-702-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition (family Law) / Interlocutory Recusal Application Heard and Decided
Outcome
Application allowed; counsel for petitioner required to withdraw/recuse.
Legal Topics
Recusal of Counsel, Conflict of Interest, Solicitor Conduct, Confidentiality of Client Information, Appearance of Impropriety
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Legal Profession and Ethics Civil Procedure Recusal of Counsel Conflict of Interest Solicitor Conduct Confidentiality of Client Information Appearance of Impropriety

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Radha Krishnan a/l Rajoo

Petitioner (husband)

Vijaya Letchumy a/p Supacandar

Respondent (wife)

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition (family Law) / Interlocutory Recusal Application Heard and Decided

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether counsel for the petitioner should be disqualified/recused for contacting the unrepresented respondent and obtaining confidential information
  2. 2 Whether conduct breached Rules 3, 4 and 5 of the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978
  3. 3 Whether confidential information obtained creates an embarrassment or real risk affecting the respondent's interests

Ratio Decidendi

Counsel for the petitioner had personally obtained sensitive confidential information from the unrepresented respondent about matters central to the divorce; that possession created an embarrassment under Rule 3(b)(i) and a real risk/appearance of unfairness such that a fair‑minded reasonable member of the public would require removal; accordingly the court ordered counsel to withdraw and allowed the recusal application.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; counsel for petitioner required to withdraw/recuse.

Orders

  • Application in Encl 12 allowed.
  • Counsel Tetuan J Hari Vivega (Vivegarubani A/P K. Kandaiah) to recuse/withdraw from representing the Petitioner.