Darshan Singh Khaira Zulkefli bin Hashim PENCELAH Majlis Peguam Malaysia

Darshan Singh Khaira Zulkefli bin Hashim PENCELAH Majlis Peguam Malaysia

Appellant practised law by providing paid legal advice and drafting submissions while his practising certificate was suspended due to bankruptcy under LPA s29(2)(b); the Disciplinary Committee had given reasons for punishment; therefore the High Court's dismissal was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
W-02(A)-306-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Perayu/appellant: Darshan Singh Khaira; Responden/pengadu: Zulkefli bin Hashim; Responden/pencelah/intervener: Majlis Peguam Malaysia
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 April 2019
Case Number
W-02(A)-306-02/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court Originating Summons to Set Aside Disciplinary Board Decision / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Suspension of Practising Certificate, Bankruptcy and Sanction Under Insolvency Act, Definition of Practising Law, Disciplinary Committee Reasons, Procedure Where Complainant Absent
Source Language
Malay/English
Legal Profession Law Insolvency Law Administrative Law Professional Disciplinary Proceedings Suspension of Practising Certificate Bankruptcy and Sanction Under Insolvency Act Definition of Practising Law Disciplinary Committee Reasons +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darshan Singh Khaira

Perayu/appellant

Zulkefli bin Hashim

Responden/pengadu

Majlis Peguam Malaysia

Responden/pencelah/intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court Originating Summons to Set Aside Disciplinary Board Decision / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred by treating appellant as an undischarged bankrupt affecting his right to appeal and sanction under Insolvency Act s38(1)(a)
  2. 2 Whether giving legal advice and drafting documents for reward constitutes practising law
  3. 3 Whether the Disciplinary Committee failed to give reasons for the punishment recommended

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant practised law by providing paid legal advice and drafting submissions while his practising certificate was suspended due to bankruptcy under LPA s29(2)(b); the Disciplinary Committee had given reasons for punishment; therefore the High Court's dismissal was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs