THANGADURAI A/L GOVINDARAJOO PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA

THANGADURAI A/L GOVINDARAJOO PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA

The contemnor (solicitor) was guilty of contempt because he knowingly pursued and relied upon orders in another High Court concerning the same subject matter while contempt proceedings and an order setting aside the Plaintiff's Letters of Administration were pending in this Court, thereby interfering with the administration of justice; acting on client instructions or ignorance of the law is no defence where conduct amounts to contempt, and the charge was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-857-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dixon Khoo Soon Hoe; 1st Defendant: Koh Jiak Chew; 2nd Defendant: Khoo Meng Khoon @ Koe Meng Khoon
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 June 2020
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-857-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Contempt and Probate/administration / Judgment and Sentencing (high Court)
Outcome
Guilty of contempt of court
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Presumption of Death Under Evidence Act, Letters of Administration, Suppression/non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications, Abuse of Process, Professional Duty to Court
Source Language
Malay/English
Contempt of Court Probate and Administration Evidence Law Civil Procedure Professional Conduct of Lawyers Committal Proceedings Presumption of Death Under Evidence Act Letters of Administration +3 more

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dixon Khoo Soon Hoe

Plaintiff

Koh Jiak Chew

1st Defendant

Khoo Meng Khoon @ Koe Meng Khoon

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contempt and Probate/administration / Judgment and Sentencing (high Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the solicitor (Govin T. Durai) committed contempt by proceeding in another High Court with matters relating to the same subject while contempt proceedings and a set-aside order were pending
  2. 2 Whether acting on client instructions or ignorance of the law is a defence to contempt
  3. 3 Whether non-disclosure of a pre-existing Grant of Letters of Administration in an ex parte application amounted to contempt and abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The contemnor (solicitor) was guilty of contempt because he knowingly pursued and relied upon orders in another High Court concerning the same subject matter while contempt proceedings and an order setting aside the Plaintiff's Letters of Administration were pending in this Court, thereby interfering with the administration of justice; acting on client instructions or ignorance of the law is no defence where conduct amounts to contempt, and the charge was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Guilty of contempt of court

Orders

  • Sentence: fine RM5,000 to be paid on or before 19 June 2020; in default of payment, one month imprisonment