SYED AHMAD IMDADZ B SAID ABAS IMEJ MUHIBAH SDN BHD PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA

SYED AHMAD IMDADZ B SAID ABAS IMEJ MUHIBAH SDN BHD PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA

The High Court affirmed the DC's finding of liability but held that under s.103D(4) LPA the Disciplinary Board must notify and give an advocate and solicitor a reasonable opportunity to be heard before making any order likely to be adverse, including where the Board intends to impose a lesser as well as a greater penalty; the DB's punishment order was therefore set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination after affording the Appellant a hearing.

Citation
AA-17A-1-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant (advocate & Solicitor): Syed Ahmad Imdadz B Said Abas; Respondent (complainant): Imej Muhibah Sdn Bhd; Intervener: Majlis Peguam Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 March 2021
Case Number
AA-17A-1-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Appeal Under the Legal Profession Act 1976 / High Court Judicial Review/appeal Remitting Penalty Decision to Disciplinary Board
Outcome
High Court affirmed liability finding; set aside the Disciplinary Board's penalty order and remitted the matter to the Disciplinary Board for fresh determination after giving the Appellant notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Right to Be Heard, Disciplinary Procedure Under S.103 D LPA, Conflict of Interest, Mitigation and Sentencing in Disciplinary Proceedings, Standard of Proof in Disciplinary Inquiries
Source Language
Malay/English
Legal Profession Regulation Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Professional Disciplinary Law Right to Be Heard Disciplinary Procedure Under S.103 D LPA Conflict of Interest Mitigation and Sentencing in Disciplinary Proceedings +1 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syed Ahmad Imdadz B Said Abas

Appellant (advocate & Solicitor)

Imej Muhibah Sdn Bhd

Respondent (complainant)

Majlis Peguam Malaysia

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Disciplinary Appeal Under the Legal Profession Act 1976 / High Court Judicial Review/appeal Remitting Penalty Decision to Disciplinary Board

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Disciplinary Committee's finding of liability affirmed by the Disciplinary Board should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the advocate and solicitor must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard before the Disciplinary Board makes an order likely to be adverse under s.103D(2)-(4) including where the Board proposes a lesser as well as a greater penalty

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court affirmed the DC's finding of liability but held that under s.103D(4) LPA the Disciplinary Board must notify and give an advocate and solicitor a reasonable opportunity to be heard before making any order likely to be adverse, including where the Board intends to impose a lesser as well as a greater penalty; the DB's punishment order was therefore set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination after affording the Appellant a hearing.

Court Disposition

High Court affirmed liability finding; set aside the Disciplinary Board's penalty order and remitted the matter to the Disciplinary Board for fresh determination after giving the Appellant notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • DB's penalty order dated 21.06.2019 set aside
  • Matter remitted to the Disciplinary Board to notify the Appellant of its intended order and to give him a reasonable opportunity to be heard before making any order likely to be adverse under s.103D LPA