INFO Johore Bar - December 2020

For Members Only Private Circulation

INFO

JOHORE BAR

A Bulletin of the Johore Bar Newsletter • Issue 24 •December 2020

“ THE WORK-FROM-HOME LAWYER, A FEASIBLE ENDEAVOUR?” (03)

IN THIS ISSUE (05)

WHAT DO THE TRADITIONS OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR STAND FOR?

(09)

THE ART OF POSTPONEMENT

(10)

R Jayabalan

CHANGES IN REAL PROPERTY GAINS TAX IN 2019

Allen Yu

GK Ganesan

RISK MANAGEMENT FOR SMALL FIRMSGK

(13)

“STICKS AND STONES”

(14)

Allen Yu

INFO Johore Bar

Johor Bahru, Malaysia info.johorebar.org.my

PK Yang

TRIAL BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING – AN EFFECTIVE CHOICE? (12)

R Jayabalan

(16)

ASSESSMENT OF STAMP DUTY FOR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY Roger Lo Ming

A FORCE TO INVOKE FORCE MAJEURE (20)

Syed Zomael Hussain (Azmi & Associates)

info.johorebar.org.my The Johore Bar Committee (“JBC”) is a statutory body to look after the welfare of members and to promote and safeguard their interest.

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK Dear Members, If there was a theme to this edition of INFO, it would be ‘better late, than never’.

This edition was initially slated to be published earlier in the year, but with so many things happening in the world, it is only now that it has come to fruition.

As tradition would have it, INFO serves to capture Johore Bar moments and memorialise them. With little events happening nowadays (most of

which are conducted online) this edition serves as a throwback to when life was normal - when we still shook hands and lived our lives without standard operating procedures. But don’t fret, we still have a good part of 2020 to cover in the next edition, like the 2020 Annual Dinner, among others.

As always, I am grateful to the members whom have contributed their articles to this edition and hope for more contributions in future.

FADHIL IHSAN (Dale)

halt with subsequent gradual resumption of operations.

The resulting uncertainties, changes, fluctuations in policies were dealt with effectively as a result of the Judiciary and other agencies relevant to legal practice, such as PTG Johor, working closely with JBC to ensure that members of the Bar were kept informed at all times, being at hand to address and resolving issues as expeditiously as possible; the flurry of circulars issued bears testament to this (one wonders if a record of sorts has been set).

In the course of navigating through these unchartered waters, the online arena blossomed. Some notable firsts – webinars for the Johore Bar, remote court hearings, the live streaming of a stay application at the Court of Appeal.

CHAIR’S FOREWORD Shahareen Begum binti Abdul Subhan The 2020/2021 term started as normal as could be expected. Then the unexpected happened – the Covid-19 pandemic hit the shores of our beloved country.

The nation entered the world of “work from home”, remote presence taking the place of the physical.

What was initially a 2 week movement control order, extended to a period covering 24 weeks, the degree of movement control dependant on the severity of the pandemic situation.

Court proceedings, land office transactions came to a 2

With social distancing (now known as physical distancing) to be observed strictly, the presence of Video Conference hearings [VCH] looks to be a dominant feature of legal practice. In an effort to meet this possible eventuality, VCH facilities have been set up at the Johore Bar Secretariat, available to members at no cost.

The JBC is also looking to ways to enhance members knowledge and skill, to equip them as best as possible to adapt to the changes from our “usual” to the “new norm” in the legal practice.

Until this ‘temporary’ arrangement ends and we return to normalcy, I wish everyone well and to #StaySafe always.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

THE WORK-FROM-HOME

LAWYER furniture that makes you, ‘you’.

The work-from-home lawyer: more hype than hope?

It was not too long ago in a brief period of uncertainty, everyone (save the frontliners and essential workers) stayed at home under the Movement Control Order. From then, until today, not one day has passed where the key words: MCO, PKP, COVID are not uttered. After a brief flattening of the curve, the MCO took on a few different flavours like conditional and recovery.

Just as we started to see a return to normalcy of business or at least as normal as 2020 permits, a recent surge in cases has now caused the implementation of lockdown in certain areas and for the first time, an imposition of work-from-home (WFH) directive from the government to selected sectors both private and public.

This of course begs the question - Can lawyers WFH? For many lawyers, their office is as comfortable as their homes. The office is the lawyers place of zen - comfortably nesting their most ideal working feng shui, the framed certificates and newspaper cutouts from 2002, not to mention the

For the everyday lawyer, working at the office (or working late) is not an obsession rather a necessity. It is where they meet clients, where the files are and most importantly, where the kids (and sometimes read: spouse) aren’t.

In these uncertain times, working from home (or “WFH”) is an eventuality that may arise at any time. We therefore no longer have the luxury of saying that we are neither ready nor able to make the sudden shift from conference table to dining table. The reality is that there may no longer be bustling offices with ringing phones but rather a carved nook in the chaos of the house for quiet study. Do take note, if it’s too quiet, the children may be up to no good.

There are some who say the blurred boundaries between work and personal life create happier and thus more productive work environments. Time will tell if this is true.

As for now, the work from home situation, a liberty by a select few professions, has and looks to be, the new norm for months to come.

Even with a vaccine in the works, who knows what plague or natural disaster awaits in our future. This article intends to look into the life

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

of the work-at-home lawyer, its ups and downs, and the tools we can use to get through these tough times and to better prepare for these tough times.

The ups and downs of remote work Let’s face it; working from home is not for everyone. The legal profession is a social profession requiring the meeting of clients, other lawyers and for litigators, going to court. The work-at-home lawyer has none of this.

In the past month, people around the world have mitigated this limited social interaction with the use of technology namely, video conferencing applications. Usage of these applications have spiked in popularity to mitigate the effects of physical absence. Companies have been able to host meetings for as many as 100 people at once.

The Malaysian Bar and some state bars too have taken to these video conferencing applications for their meetings and web based seminars (or the now oft-used portmanteau Webinars).

For the everyday lawyer, in order to keep up with all the advancement in the usage of technology taking place, he must ensure that there is proper infrastructure in both his home and office. This is disadvantageous to the non-tech savvy lawyer as he may not be well equipped to address the 3

growing online demands. Simply going to the nearest IT store and saying you want the best and most expensive laptop would mean nothing if it is not coupled with a strong internet connection to address the audio visual needs, not just for meetings and webinars but now, for his future interaction with the Courts.

As at the publishing of this article, the Courts have started to conduct case management and hearings online via video conferencing and the formulation of legislation and rules towards online hearings is in the works. As it stands, lawyers stand divided on the effectiveness of hearings or trials conducted online despite in being the only option of the work-from-home lawyer. Those in opposition of such measures do not see that online trials can produce a quality, collegial, and effective examination of witnesses.

It is the same for online hearings on whether will bring forth the ‘death of advocacy’ due to the non presence of counsel. All of this is left to be examined.

Then, there is the concern of privacy.

In adapting to a virtual lifestyle where everything is online and in the cloud, comes the pervasive issue of privacy. Lawyers deal with confidential information; it is pertinent that they hold custody of that information as safely as possible.

With working-from-home, the first privacy concern comes where such confidential information can be heard and/or accessed by anyone at home or by other members of the family or your roommates.

Secondly, the usage of online communications exposes the lawyer for such conversations to be recorded by a third-party. Depending on the prevalent privacy laws, consent may be required by the parties in the call.

Productivity Assuming all the issues above are addressed, comes the issue of discipline. Productivity whilst working at home can be different from person to person. Some lack the discipline it takes to focus in their humble abode, without the hustle 4

and bustle of an office environment.

Others, like the writer, enjoy the quiet non-distracting surrounding of his home giving ability to concentrate.

Whichever your circumstance, work productivity determines completion, and completion translates to fees.

More often than not, the flexibility of time can allow better work-family balance, allowing for allocated time for children, school, emergencies, and appointments - among the many parental obligations. Work can be done even at the pitch of night, which past experience has taught us seem to be when some fresh and novel legal arguments just seem to flow (usually the midnight of that day a submission due). It has been common to receive emails, during the lockdown period, well past midnight, from banks, clients, lawyers and even the Malaysian Bar. In light of this, some may find that they work longer hours due to being ‘always available’ as this writer has experienced. If not working from home, this edition of the newsletter would not have been possible, but let’s save that for the next AGM.

Strategies for the work at home lawyer If you have found within yourself discipline to work from home and worked past your technophobia (fear or dislike of advanced technology or complex devices, especially computers), it may be useful to follow these steps.

that the space or time allocated is not to be interrupted.

If there is a need to break the boundary, try to mix business with pleasure. Certain less cognitively demanding routine work tasks, for example, can be done while watching TV with the family. Let the family members know that you are doing your work, but also like to stay around with minimal participation.

Perhaps a win-win situation can be established.

2. Dress for the day Start your day as if you were going to the office. Go about your ordinary morning routine - coffee, yoga what have you. Being in decorum is useful for the matters that you will be attending to for the day and reinforces the ‘work’ part of your day. This is also useful in maintaining the boundary set with your family members.

3. Use video calls For the crux of the communication that you will have with your colleagues or your counterparty it is important to use video calls.

Video calls should be preferred over traditional calls for the reason that there is a better connection with the person that we are speaking to despite the distance apart that you are. Having a group video chat creates a better integrated environment along with ability to share the screen and allow for better collaboration.

What the future 1. Create a working area and brings setting of boundaries.

Find a quiet place for you and your equipment to which you identify as your ‘workspace’. Some find solace and quiet in a storeroom (at the direction of someone else), some at the balcony. If no space is available, appropriate a time where a common space is deemed office space. Whilst easier said than done, enforce with the family that certain hours of the week are ‘office hours’, so no TV and no ruckus. Make sure you reinforce

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

For as long as this movement control order (conditional or otherwise) is in place, there is no saying if we will have to go back to working from home. Being a WFH lawyer may be inconvenient, but may be a necessity. Experience suggest that it’s necessity may be enforced with as little as a 2-day notice. It is therefore time we evolve and embrace the new working culture to address the challenges of the new legal landscape

What do the traditions of the Malaysian Bar stand for?

The Malaysian Bar has preserved the traditions of the legal profession. Some of them are more than 500 years old. The Bar insists on keeping them. Why? The oldest records of the Inns of Court are said to be the Black Books of Lincoln’s Inn. They place the beginnings of the English Bar to the year 1422.

Some historians trace the origins of the English Bar to a date far before that.

As the British Empire expanded, British barristers arrived to set up practice first in India; and afterwards, across the Commonwealth. By this migration, the Malayan Bar inherited many of the English Bar’s traditions.

We have one or two homegrown ones as well.

‘Tradition’ signifies the transmission of long-established customs.

By GK Ganesan October 20, 2018

Why refer to judges as the ‘Bench’ and advocates as the ‘Bar ’ ?

horizontal bars. These bars divided a court into three areas. One bar separated a raised platform, used by the judges’ as a table, from the rest of the room. This was known as the ‘Bench’.

The second bar separated the area for lawyers from the space allocated to members of the public. From this area, onlookers could observe court proceedings. And so it came to be called the ‘Gallery’.

See how the Well of Court is separated by horizontal bar In the days of old, a courtroom was enclosed by two parallel, raised,

The two ‘bars’ enclosed the lowered central area, often called the ‘Well of the court.’ That is a space reserved only for legal practitioners to sit. In reality barristers were ‘advocates’.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

They ‘advocated’ for the rights of their clients. To this day, unless the court invites a person into the Well, no one has a right to sit there except the advocates.

Over time, judges came to be referred to as ‘the Bench.’ The barristers were collectively known as ‘the Bar’.

Under the Legal Profession Act 1976, the collective body of advocates and solicitors in Peninsular Malaysia is known as the ‘The Malaysian Bar’. Hence a legal practitioner will introduce himself to you with these words: ‘I am a member of the Bar.’ 5

Wigs, gowns, bands and Bar jackets Over time, the design of a legal practitioner’s sartorial ensemble assumed a particular form. So, no discussion of the traditions of the Bar can be complete without an explanation of the usage of wigs, gowns, bands, and the use of certain expressions or certain codes of conduct in the courts of law.

Robe [or gown] Barristers have worn robes since mediaeval times. It was a sign of scholarship. Until the Tudor period, the robes were closed at the front and brightly coloured. By the start of the 16th century, robes were long open gowns of sombre colour, typically mulberry.

The gown [or ‘robe’ as it known in Malaysia] was only worn in court. It had pleated shoulders and bell-shaped sleeves. The sleeves tapered at the elbow with two buttons. These type of robes were once only worn by juniors. Senior barristers, called ‘Queen’s Counsel,’ wore silk gowns and elaborate buttoned jackets.

In Malaysia, we have done away with this difference.

Why black?

It is said that the British tradition of wearing black robes began when barristers and judges adopted – in 1694 – the mourning dress for Queen Mary II. Then, high court judges reverted to robes of scarlet and violet. But barristers retained their black gowns; as did subordinate court judges. By the eighteenth century, American judges had followed suit.

The second theory is more plausible.

It grounds its hypothesis on the fact that black dye was expensive in ancient times. It was therefore unavailable to commoners. The use of black tunic were the preserve of the well-heeled. Over 400 years ago, the Bar composed of persons who had means to tertiary education.

These were usually members of the 6

aristocracy. It stood to reason that they had the money, and therefore the privilege, to wear black gowns.

By late 17th century, barristers had adopted black gowns.

held in the left hand. The liripipe has survived on the robe to this day, and is now represented by the strip of cloth that hangs down the front of the modern gown.

The liripipe

Wig

The robe has a piece triangular chute or pouch attached to the left shoulder. This was the cast over the barristers’ shoulder. From the bag, a hollow cloth tassel [known as ‘liripipe,’] projected over, and into, the front of the left shoulder. It is cut in two lengthways. It was a cloth pipe.

The origin of the wig is lost in the mists of time. It would seem that when Charles II returned to England from France from the court of Louis XIV, he brought with him the trend of the ‘periwig’. Fashion-conscious members of the English society adopted this trend, Barristers fell into this fashion in or about 1663.

At the Mokhtar Hashim trial in 1978, the trial judge was Hashim Yeop Abdullah Sani J. He created a stir at that trial. He cast aside his wig; and publicly cast aside judicial tradition.

The reason for its existence is mysterious. There are two theories about it.

Hong Kong barristers and judges continue to wear wigs as part of court dress.

The location of the mysterious pouch. You can see the liripipe begin at the top of the triangle The first is that it was once a money sack for fees. A barrister, being an aristocrat, was too rich to ask for money. He could not be offended. But if some emolument could be slipped into the chute, it would find its way down through the ‘liripipe’. The chute was divided into two segments. One for gold coins, and the other for silver. The clients placed ex-gratia payment into counsel’s money chute, literally behind their back. This way a barrister’s dignity would be preserved, it is said. I suspect it also meant he could not see what was being paid! All he could feel was the heavy jingle of coins, which would be rather persuasive.

The second theory is that the chute is a derivative of the mourning hood introduced following the death of Charles II. That formed part of the traditional mourning dress of the time. The liripipe was originally

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

In July 2007, judges of New South Wales, Australia voted to discontinue the wearing of wigs.

Senior members of the Malaysian Bar say that the practice of wearing wigs in our courts disappeared in the late 1970s. From all accounts, it appears that wigs were discarded because they tended to itch, were expensive to buy and maintain, and were far too hot for our local weather. What a relief!

After centuries of tradition, the Speaker of the House of Commons in Britain, and more recently the Lord Chancellor himself, have dispensed with wearing a wig in Parliament.

Bar Jacket Senior advocates sometimes wear a waistcoat combined into a single garment with their jackets. It was called the ‘Bar jacket’ or ‘Court waistcoat’. Lady advocates wear dark suits, but instead of the wing collar, they often wear bands attached to a collarette.

The bands are tied over wing collars.

Bands [Tabs or Jabots]

Until 1640, it was a fashion for lawyers to wear neck ruffs to court.

Thereafter they simply swapped neck wraps for ‘falling bands’, so as to conceal the collar of the shirt.

Bands [‘tabs’ or ‘jabots’] are attached to the wing collar of an advocate’s linen shirt.

It is a normal collar with its tips, but with 90% of its circumferential second layer removed.

What is left is a stiff, two inch thick collar.

Equality An advocate’s ensemble is a creature of custom and fashion.

In Malaysia, all advocates dress in robes without embellishments. The black colour of the robe and the lack of any distinguishing mark on it demonstrates equality of counsel.

Once an advocate puts on his or her gown, he or she is of the same rank as any other advocate.

The bands were originally wide, and tied with lace at the front. Even now, you will see some barristers knot the bands by bringing the knot below the chin and under the tabs.

The tabs were another indicia of learning, for doctors, clergymen and men of academia also wore them.

It is an ‘equaliser’.

“A black robe grants each Malaysian advocate professional equality. That the one is a senior and the other junior is irrelevant: the former gets no privileges, and the latter is subject to no prejudice.

The court is only interested in the truth, and the quality of the arguments.

At an investiture ceremony held at the Middle Temple Hall on 2 May 1594, the Lord Chief Justice advised new recruits about court dress. In referring to the linen ‘bands’, he said:

This is one of the most wonderful qualities of the Malaysian Bar.

‘These two tongues do signifie that as you should have one tongue for the rich for your fee, as a reward for your long studies and labours, so should you also have another tongue as ready, without reward, to defend the poor and oppressed.’

Where can the barristers ensemble be worn?

To use the word ‘bibs’ for ‘bands’ for the bands is not only a misnomer but also infantile.

Wing collars

We have preserved tradition, but practise what we preach: the primacy of constitutional equality.

Gowns and bands are worn only inside the court building. There are, of course, very limited exceptions to this rule: if one was taking the lift down to the basement to have a cup of tea, or if one had to walk across a court to photocopy some documents between hearings, not too much would be made. Even then, one is expected to tuck one’s tabs in under one’s jacket and remove one’s robes.

Parading oneself in town as would Batman in the dead of night with the robe flying in the wind, is frowned upon. It is not a done thing.

It is not ‘proper’.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Ungentlemanly to use Royal Titles It has thus been a long-standing English tradition, as it is also in Malaysia, that royal titles are never used by counsel when introducing themselves or their opponents – whether within the court or without.

A recent circular by the Chief Justice of Malaysia calls this to mind. Again, no lawyer will say, of another lawyer, ‘This is my colleague, Datuk So and So.’ It is never done. No one will insist on being referred to with their royal title. You know why? It detracts from the Equality Principle that lawyers have fought so hard to establish.

Courtroom Etiquette The tradition of bowing before a judge is one that has survived many centuries.

One is said to bow not to the judge, but to the ‘presence’ of the King, whom the judge represents.

The tradition of ‘dressing the judge’ [not ‘addressing’ the judge] requires that the barrister should never leave a courtroom if it means that the judge would be left on his own.

Another tradition is that there must be, at any one time, only one person on his [or her] feet addressing the judge.

If there is a real necessity to address the judge while one’s opponent is on his feet, the proper thing to do would be to rise and to ask permission whether you could ‘interpose’.

The use of certain expressions Barristers refer to each other as ‘my learned friend’.

To call an opponent ‘my opponent’ or ‘my friend’ is to wound him mortally.

7

Only your story is alive and organic.

It is a living creature. It enacts itself before the eye of the court’s mind.

Traditions for courtesy Some other traditions are really rules of courtesy. One of these is the practice of ‘standing down’ cases.

If your opponent is not in court at the appointed time, and the case is called up for hearing, it is proper to request the judge to ‘stand the case down’ so that you could call to him.

If your opponent is uncouth, or improper, remain silent. When it is your turn, present your case courteously and clearly.

Your tone is everything. You are there to persuade the judge; not berate your opponent.

Judges do not like drama or hysteria.

They prefer the quiet, unassuming voice of reason.

clear,

Have you heard of the ‘Disappearing Counsel’?

There is another tradition at the Bar. You are speaking at court.

Apart from the occasional rustle of papers and the hum of the air conditioning, the court is quiet. All five judges of the Federal Court are listening attentively.

You are telling your client’s side of the story.

If your words are compelling, time does not matter. There is an occasional query; the others are eager for the story to continue.

The court is interested in the story.

Not you.

Not your Brioni suit.

Not your false western accent which neither fits below south of the Watford Gap, nor above the lilt of Yorkshire.

It is your client’s story.

It is so compelling the judges begin to see pictures of the various points in the story. It is like watching a video.

Tell it.

You disappear.

8

A senior practitioner, a colleague of the pupil-master [called ‘the Mover’] then addresses the judge.

He is referred to as the ‘Mover’ because he ‘moves the court’, i.e., he applies to the court to accept the pupil as an advocate and solicitor.

The highlight at the Call is the way the Mover introduces the pupil.

Lightning. Fire. Justice. All hang in the balance

It has a tight plot. Momentum.

Characterisation. The sudden twist.

And then the shining question.

Not a confused conclusion that pulls at the nose of the court, but a question that compels the judges to answer in your favour.

Have you ever told stories to you children? Or grandchildren? Try it.

Not all the rhetoric or legal training in the world will prepare you for the innocent, probing questions with which children assail a doubt.

If you can answer them, you can answer any supreme court. In any country.

That dear friend, is the disappearing act. It is the tradition of telling a truthful story.

And that is a tradition of the Bar!

‘Call to the Bar’ When a trainee was ready to be accepted a barrister, he or she was called by name, and given privilege to enter, from the Gallery, into the Well of the Court. He was called into the Bar. Thus arose the expression ‘called to the Bar’. The occasion itself was called ‘The Call’.

Thus, pupils in Malaysia become members of the Bar by being ‘called to the Bar’.

After his or her training, a pupil will petition the court to become a legal practitioner. On the day of his or her Call, the pupil rises before the judge.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Some counsel quote poetry or scripture, others speak of matters that are important to the general practice at the Bar. After the Mover’s speech, the judge will make an order ‘admitting and enrolling’ the pupil as an advocate and solicitor.

That right there is a very Malaysian tradition. And it is quite old.

Unfortunately, it is a dying tradition.

Why do we need these traditions at the Bar? Every profession has its own traditions.

The Bar has its own.

Why bother with stuffy old rules?

Well, traditions define who we are.

They identify an advocate’s creed, and what he or she stands for. And they are hallowed by time.

By observing traditions, we pay homage to those who have gone before us – for they it is who have made our path easier to tread.

And in so doing, we leave behind a legacy for those who would come after us.

In that way, we ensure that they walk the professional path with honour, dignity and valour, seeking to assist all, but injuring none.

[I wrote this article in the first quarter of 2014. The Malaysian Bar’s magazine, ‘Praxis’, published it. I reproduce it here for you, my friend.]

free date at all. The trick was to fill his diary with court dates. No court ever bothered to check on his reasons. At each postponement he would demand payment from his clients, and when they could no longer pay him, he would apply to discharge himself. He was well known for defending cases that did not have any merits and could delay cases for five years or more.

THE ART OF POSTPONEMENT

By Allen Yu Our Chief Judge in his Arahan Amalan Bil. 1/2019 on the issue of postponement of cases, stated among other things that where lawyers were applying for the postponement of their matters on the day of hearing or trial, no postponement shall be allowed unless it was for reasons unavoidable (“sebab-sebab yang tidak dielakkan”) Only two examples were cited, and they are where the lawyer was suddenly ill and a medical certificate is produced, and where any one of the witnesses could not attend because of reasons unavoidable. I was hoping for more examples.

In my early years of practise, there was this lawyer who was very good at postponing his cases. He would take all cases for an initial fee. He would agree to a date for hearing which was already a case for mention or hearing of another of his case or cases. Before that day of hearing came, he would ask for an adjournment from his opponent citing his other cases in other courts.

He would give his “free” dates.

When his opponent agrees to the postponement and to mention on his behalf, that new date will turn out to be not a

Well, the first time he asked me for a postponement from me, I granted his request. I refused the second time. He would then plead with me that we were both from the Inns of Courts, and that I should obliged him in the name of our fraternity or brotherhood. I refused.

He then decided to call my boss who refused to interfere with my decision.

He telephoned the Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) who would be hearing my application for summary judgment then. And guess what?

He got his postponement and did not turn up on that day of hearing.

The SAR told me that he granted the postponement because that lawyer said he was getting a medal (“pingat”) from the Sultan on that day. I asked that it be recorded and that he should produce his pingat on the next hearing date. However it turns out that his excuse was true, because I read in the newspaper the following day. The SAR, also following that day, playfully grabbed that lawyer’s neck from behind and with another hand going through his inner pockets of his coat said, “Mana pingat!? Mana pingat!?”.

One of the reasons for postponement would be on compassionate grounds, for example the lawyer being sick, family members terminally ill or had an accident.

There was one time I agreed to a postponement when my opponent requested it on the grounds that he was not prepared for the hearing mentally, as he was stressed out handling his father’s medical care. His father had cancer and the lawyer had to arrange his medical care for him.

I got a postponement once myself when I had forgotten I had a hearing on that day. My office staff had not written in my diary the first hearing date. The judge accepted my excuse and

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

said that everyone was entitled to make that mistake, ONCE. There was never a second time.

The recent case involving our former Prime Minister started with a notoriety because of its postponements. There were appeals to higher courts over the decisions of the court to hear the matter. A pet dog injured the defence lawyer’s hand. An application for review of the higher court’s decisions.

The public grew weary and angry at the postponements.

My office recently found evidence of a rat present. I wonder would the court believe me if I told the court that the rat ate my documents?

Office staffs are notorious for taking leaves. In addition to sickness, their other reasons included - Parents died.

Grandmother died. Aunty died. Cousin died. No babysitter for her children.

Would the court accept these reasons if it’s a lawyer asking for one?

“My car broke down” is another reason. I have come across this reason twice. I would give him or her the benefit of the doubt and agree to a postponement.

Because it happened to myself once. I was on the way to the prison to see a client. When I stop to use the washroom located beside the highway, I could not start my car later.

But I think the most famous reason given for the postponement, and which was reported in the MLJ was the case of a female lawyer asking her opponent for a postponement of their case in the Federal or Supreme Court. Her male opponent refused her request. She then told him to watch how she was going to get the postponement. She told the judges something like this, “My Lords, I have an illness that comes once every month, and this month it had come of all time, today. And not only that, it is excruciating painful this time. I have no options but to ask for an adjournment.”

Needless to say, she got her postponement.

The motto of our court these days seems to be “Justice Delay is Justice Denied” and bravo to that. Others disagree and said it was more like, “Justice in a hurry, is no justice.”

9

RISK MANAGEMENT FOR SMALL FIRMS

by Jayabalan Raman Kutty

Risk management refers to identifying the risk factors that the solicitor or the firm is exposed to in carrying out legal practice that could hurt and damage the practice and formulating procedures to avoid and manage such risks.

Looking at the statistics on the complaints and claims against small firms there is genuine concern that small firms - with their less formal management structure and personalised decision making style with less accountability as opposed to a large partnership firm - may have underestimated or sidestepped the importance of risk management. This article proposes to identify the risks in several aspects of management of the small firms and some solutions to manage the risks.

Client management Whilst the firm pursues the client’s case rigorously there is risk of the client not being fully informed of the work to be done and the progress of the work. Assuming it is a litigation work - the client is not appraised of the important features of their case, the opponent’s case, the purpose of a particular evidence and the issues that would likely determine the outcome of the case.

A common explanation was that the client would not understand the legal issues anyway. Hence no point in troubling the client. This is not advisable and could lead to misunderstanding and clashes with the client.

What then can be done to better manage the client?

(1) Obtain a written retainer that states the nature of the work to 10

be undertaken and the fee or fee structure. A letter merely confirming the appointment and the fees is insufficient if the general scope and nature of the work to be undertaken is not included. Be clear on the scope of work and ensure that the client is also made aware of the scope of work.

(2) Exercise caution and patience when quoting fees. Do not quote a fee until the general scope of the work to be done is confirmed; alternatively provide provisions for revision of the fees when required.

Advice early on the disbursements.

Be familiar with fee structures such as fixed fee, success fee or conditional fee. Ensure that the fee quoted justifies the work and the client is made aware of the same. The client has a right to know what they are getting into in as much as the firm is entitled to be remunerated adequately for their work.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

(3) Keep the client informed at every turn of the proceedings. Help the client to appreciate the pleadings, affidavits, bundle of documents and submissions. This will take a lot of time but will go a long a way in managing the client’s expectation of the proceedings and the client’s appreciation of the strength and weaknesses of his case.

(4) The lawyer in charge should personally manage the firm’s relationship with the client. Do not leave it entirely to the staff. Never be too busy for the client. Never keep the client waiting for too long. Provide answers whenever the client queries. A personalized, competent and timely service to the client is necessary. Remember that an unhappy client equates a potential complaint to the Disciplinary Board – and a negligence suit.

must be put in place whenever electronic devices are moved out of the office such as for replacement, maintenance and repair works and Fraudsters are constantly evolving in cases of missing or stolen devices.

Safety management

to exploit the economic needs of small firms and to take advantage of the processes that the profession has traditionally put in place to facilitate instructions and transactions.

The safety and reliability of our traditional processes in the firms can no longer be taken for granted.

Amongst the simple steps that may be taken instruct staff not to open attachment or links from unknown sender, regularly update anti-virus and anti-malware software, regularly back-up data and test the back-up, do not use public wi-fi to secure office e-mail or data, Small firms are particularly use a VPN when working off-site vulnerable because of the less and password protect the data and formal management structure and change the password regularly. over reliance on staff by the busy proprietor and partner.

What can be done?

(1) Identity management - implement standard procedures to verify the identity of the client. Is he who he claims he is? Don’t fall for promises of fast money or easy money to overlook the need to verify the client’s identity.

Take additional steps amongst others IC search, CCM search, bankruptcy search and land office search on the client and the assets he claims to be his. Examine carefully every document and proof of title or ownership given by the client in order to detect possible forgery or fraud.

Be wary also of the risk of financial fraud by the law firm staff. Accounts clerk stealing money from client’s account is no longer uncommon but this is only possible because the proprietors/partners allowed this to happen by placing too much trust on the staff for their own convenience.

Put in place sufficient vetting and verification process for every payment, online transfer, remittance and cheque signing.

(3) Physical data management original documents from client such as document of title, securities certificate, agreements, certificates and tangible items, if at all required to be kept by the firm, should be kept secured and to be handled only Be familiar with the Bank Negara by authorized staff.

AMLA requirements to protect The case file itself should be carefully handled and not to be passed around freely. A good practice would be one staff to keep open only one file at any one time on the desk. This would ensure documents do not get lost or misplaced.

Lawyers to be cautious when carrying the file to the Court or third party offices. Avoid carrying the whole file and only bring the required parts of the file. The (2) Electronic data management - data is removal and movement of the parts now very susceptible to alteration are to be recorded on the file. and theft. Cyber crime and electronic scams are no longer unforeseeable When meeting clients in the office, for small firms. E-mail, whatsapp avoid placing irrelevant files on and wi-fi, amongst others, have the table. Be cautious when the made movement of data very easy, lawyer has to step out of the room with that the increased risk of theft, momentarily leaving the client unauthorized use and alteration. alone. Theft by client of documents Put in place procedures to protect sensitive data received by the firm through electronic means and to protect movement of the data within the firm and beyond. Staff must be educated on the risk of cyber crime, electronic scams and data alterations. Data security procedures

on the handling of clients’ money.

When in doubt follow the golden rule – what is in the clients’ account is not yours! Misappropriation of client’s money or even ‘short term borrowing’ from the clients’ account is a serious misconduct that could be punished by striking off the Rolls or suspension. Criminal charges and civil suit could follow.

from the office file is not unheard off. Be extra cautious in cases when the firm has obtained documents or items to be examined by the client pursuant to solicitors’ undertaking.

(4) Financial management proprietors and partners of small firms should be familiar with the rules

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

against the exploitation of accounts by rogue clients for money laundering and terrorism financing.

These requirements could be burdensome for small firms but necessary to protect the practice from being exploited by fraudsters.

Conclusion Management of legal practice is fraught with risks. It is more difficult for small firms to manage the risks.

This is understood. The proprietor and the partners have to focus on their legal work, management of the firm and financial side of the practice all at the same time. This could result in risks being overlooked, sidestepped or at times ignored by giving the benefit of doubt. However, this ought not to be. It is too risky to do so. Risk management could make or break a practice and professional careers could be ended. Small firms must restructure their management and put back risk management at the forefront of their practice to ensure a safe and sustainable practice for the long term.

Jayabalan Raman Kutty 11

TRIAL BY WAY OF VIDEO CONFERENCING – AN EFFECTIVE CHOICE? The discussions on the proposed amendments to the rules by the judiciar typo to facilitate proceedings via remote communication technology has raised this question - Is it possible to have an effective and fair trial by way of video conferencing?

The answer was given in Nottingham, England on 27.3.2020.

First, the facts. By March 2020, Covid-19 had been unleashed.

Public safety precautions had been put in place including social distancing. A case came up for trial for three days on 17.3.2020 before the Court of Protection at Nottingham. It was literally a matter of life and death. A man in his seventies has been receiving hydration and nutrition through feeding tube since suffering a major stroke in 2016. His daughter was convinced that he would not want to continue living in such a state as he had expressed a wish that he would rather die than be kept alive as a ‘body in a bed’. She asked the doctors to withdraw the feeding tube believing that to be her father’s wish, against her own wish. The doctors disagreed as medically he was still capable of enjoying certain aspects of his life. The matter was referred to the Court of Protection. The judge was Justice Mostyn.

All parties agreed that the matter was important enough not to be adjourned but the outbreak of Covid-19 meant that a conventional courtroom trial was unacceptable due to the health risk to the participants. An alternative solution had to be found. With less than 24 hours before the trial, on the suggestion of one of the solicitors, the Court agreed to conduct the trial by way of video conferencing using the platform Skype for Business. This was going to be the first trial in England and Wales to be held entirely by way of video conferencing. The press was informed and reporters were invited to attend, via remote means, of course.

The trial went on as scheduled for three days. The judge, solicitors, parties and witnesses used lap top from their respective home and office throughout England. There were five sets of solicitors. Eleven witnesses including three expert witnesses gave evidence. Two journalists attended to report on the proceedings. Justice Mostyn had to decide the dreaded question - whether the feeding and treatment tube should be withdrawn to allow the man to be set on the path leading to inevitable death. 2 On 27.3.2020 Justice Mostyn delivered the decision. On the pioneering video conference trial, he was impressed and set the tone for the future when he said - “The trial went on almost without a hitch” and “In the current national crisis, it must be expected 12

that hearings will be conducted remotely in this way as a matter of routine practice.”

Why is this case of importance?

Not only because it was the first full blown trial by video conference; but more because of the various aspects of the proceedings itself – that lawyers would usually be concerned with when it comes to ensuring a fair and effective trial .

There was a sense of urgency in the matter. The subject matter was important enough – a matter of life and death. There were multiple parties and a battery of solicitors involved. It was a lengthy trial. There were multiple witnesses. There was expert evidence to be examined – not one but three experts. The facts were complex with scientific data. There was heavy documentation with a total of 929 pages of evidence and witness statements all produced via electronic files. The parties were geographically located at various corners of England. The decision to go by way of video conference was made on the eve of the proceedings with less than 24 hours notice and yet the technical challenges were met and resolved.

Access to public was also made possible by having reporters present to report on the proceedings.

So, is it possible to have an effective and fair trial by way of video conferencing?

This case is a good reliable evidence to suggest a strong ‘yes’. The idea of trial by way of video conferencing or other proceedings by way of electronic means should be warmly welcomed and embraced by lawyers here – provided of course that the necessary legal and regulatory footing must be put in place first. Whilst conventional courtroom hearing is still the gold standard and the preferred choice, hearing via electronic means should be accepted as a reliable alternative along with conventional hearing.

Oh yes, so what was the decision in that quantum leap trial?

Sitting remotely, on 27.3.2020, Justice Mostyn held that it was categorically contrary to the best interests of the man to be set on the path that will lead to his inevitable death. There 3 was evidence that although he was grossly physically and mentally impaired, he was cognitively active and emotionally aware. He enjoyed eating doughnuts, listening to music and a particular Irish radio station, and became emotional when poems were read to him. With that the application by the daughter to remove the treatment and feeding tubes was dismissed.

The full judgment may be reached at A Clinical Commissioning Group v AF, 2020 EWCOP 16.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Jayabalan Raman Kutty

CHANGES IN REAL PROPERTY GAINS TAX IN 2019

As announced in the Budget 2019, with effect from 1 January 2019, some important changes have been made to the rates of real property gains tax [RPGT] on the disposal of real property.

The important points of the changes made in RPGT pursuant to the Budget 2019 are as follows: For companies, non-citizens and non-permanent residents, real property gains tax is increased by 5%, from 5% to 10%.

For citizens and permanent residents, at least 5% RPGT Is payable, an increase from 0% to 5%.

By P K Yang

The stamp duty payable on the transfer of any property valued above RM1million is increased by 1%, from 3% to 4%. [Note: This will only take effect from 1 July 2019 pursuant to a subsequent statement made by the Finance Minister.]

16 April 2019

[see the Star, 2-11- 2018]

The 2019 Budget Speech was delivered in Parliament by the new Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng in November 2018.

Basically, the rates of RPGT for the year 2018 are still applicable in the year 2019, except that any disposal of real property after 5 years of acquisition will attract a higher rate of RPGT. For citizens or permanent residents, at least 5% RPGT is now payable for disposal after 5 years of acquisition Up till the end of last year [2018] NO RPGT was payable by any citizen or permanent resident for the sale or disposal of real property after 5 years of purchase or acquisition.

But, with effect from 1-1-2019, at least 5% RPGT is payable by a citizen or permanent resident upon such sale or disposal of his real property.

In other words, commencing on 1 January 2019, at least 5% RPGT is payable by a citizen or permanent resident for the disposal of his property kept by him for more than 5 years, ie. from the 6th year onwards. If he has kept the property for many years, say, for more than 40 years, he is still liable to pay at least 5% gains tax.

Even last year 2018, no RPGT was payable if a citizen or permanent resident were to sell or dispose of his property after 5 years of the purchase or acquisition.

Rates of RPGT payable in 2019 Appended below are the Schedules of RPGT rates payable in 2019:

Schedule 1 - 2019 RPGT rates

for companies, citizens and permanent residents Disposal in

First 3 years

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Citizen/ PR

30%

20%

15%

5%

Company

30%

20%

15%

10%

Note: The only changes in the rates of RPGT relate to any sale or disposal after 5 years onwards: at least 5% for citizens; and 10% for companies.

Schedule 2 : 2019 RPGT rates for non-citizens Disposal in

First 5 years

6th year onwards

Non-citizen

30%

10%

RPGT rates payable before the amendment [2018] For purposes of comparison, the old RPGT rates for 2018 [since 2014] are shown in the following schedules:

Schedule 3 : 2018 RPGT rates

for companies, citizens and permanent residents Disposal in Citizen/ PR

Company

First 3 years

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

30%

20%

15%

0%

30%

20%

15%

5%

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

13

Schedule 4 : 2018 RPGT rates for non-citizens Disposal in

First 5 years

After 5 years

Non-citizen

30%

5%

ST

Salient points to note The highest rate of RPGT payable in 2019 is 30%. It is applicable to all sellers or disposers, whether citizens, permanent residents, non-citizens or companies.

For a citizen or permanent resident, before the year 2019, NO RPGT was payable after 5 years of acquisition or purchase. This was the most distinctive feature of RPGT rates applicable to citizens or permanent residents. But now in 2019, at least 5% RPGT is payable by a citizen or permanent resident.

For a non-citizen or a company, before the amendment, only 5% RPGT was payable after 5 years onwards. Now, at least 10% RPGT is payable by a non-citizen or a company in 2019.

No distinction is made between a foreign company or a local company so far as the rates of RPGT payable are concerned. At least 10% RPGT is payable, and for the first 3 years of acquisition, the maximum rate of 30% RPGT is payable by any company.

For citizens: The maximum rate of 30% RPGT is payable for the first 3 years only. For non-citizens : 30% RPGT is payable for the first 5 years.

Conclusion If any person has kept his property for more than 5 years, it can only be termed an investment. Under no circumstances can it be regarded as speculation.

It has to be borne in mind that the original intention of the Real Property Gains Tax 1976 was to replace the Land Speculation Tax Act 1975, a piece of legislation enacted for the purpose of fighting or curbing speculation. It was not meant to be a form of tax on any investment.

It is far from being reasonable to impose at least 5% RPGT on a citizen for the disposal of his property after keeping it as an investment for decades or for many years, after the acquisition of the property.

It is too far-fetched to regard such a long-term investment as speculation on the part of the citizen. The property might have been kept by him for decades, say 40 years or so since 1970s.

To impose any RPGT on the disposal of his property in such circumstances would at once create the impression that the powers-that-be have covertly introduced “an investment tax” under a piece of legislation meant for fighting speculation.

This certainly will not go down well with the citizenry.

14

By Allen Yu There is an English nursery rhyme that goes like this“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”.

The rhyme persuades the child victim of name calling to ignore the taunt, to refrain from physical retaliation, and to remain calm and good living.

This is good advice and the adults can also learn from this.

Where slander is concerned, I would normally tell the complainant to let the remarks passed. I would tell them of the nursery rhyme above. And that their good reputation can withstand those few remarks. Anybody who is somebody in town would have both nice and not so nice words said of them.

There is also the saying that the innocent need not tell the world he is innocent. Only the guilty ones need to do that.

There was this one time a fellow lawyer asked me to sue his former client, who stood outside his office door, and telling the passers-by not to see this “dishonest lawyer”. My advice to him was to do nothing. And without any opposition, that ex client soon grew tired and went home. No damage was done to that lawyer’s reputation.

Suing a person for defamation can backfire sometimes. I am always reminded of the English case of Oscar Wilde, the famous poet and writer.

He sued his young male friend’s father for writing the word “Sodomite” on a piece of paper and asked someone to hand deliver it to Wilde. The deliverer read the message, and Wilde sued. Homosexuality was a crime in those days in England. However during the trial, the Defence lawyer was able to prove the truth of that word. Wilde lost and was soon prosecuted and found guilty. He died a broken man and a bankrupt.

I had a case where a man claimed that his aunt had defamed him when she made a police report stating that both he and his foreign workers tried to remove her pants in the estate.

They were detained by the police but later released as the aunt was persuaded to withdraw the complaint by family members. However, the nephew later sued. He lost the case

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

TICKS AND STONES and the judge made very disparaging remarks of his character in his written decision. My client asked me for a copy of the decision. She later printed a hundred copies and passed it around. He should have let the matter rest.

In today’s modern society, the social media platform allows people to voice their opinion on just about anything. This follows that libellous statements will be more regular than before. And because more people can see it, the impact will be greater.

In recent years, I have been approached by some people to sue others for what was written in the Facebook (“FB”).

In one case a tuition teacher was upset when some 13 year old boys who were not his students stated in the FB, that he was molesting his female students. He traced them and found their names and where they were schooling. Suing 13 year olds??? Not my cup of tea. I advise him to seek the help of the principal of their school to resolve the matter. The principal called a meeting with the parents and the matter was amicably settled.

In another case, a businessman had suffered financial loss because of 2 ladies who wrote nasty things in the FB about the services provided by his company. They

even openly stated that they want to shut down his business. Malice is clear here. The strange thing was that they were not even his customers. I was about to take the case until I found that one of the ladies was the daughter of a friend. I declined and offered instead to mediate between them. He did not accept it and discharged me.

Besides defamation, opinions and remarks can often be insulting of one’s race and religion. My advice is either you ignore them or if you must reply, reply without returning the insult.

In one of my FB reply to a man who wrote that Lim Guan Eng can only be a Prime Minister if he was a Muslim, I wrote that I agree with him, but can LGE’s Islam be similar to the views of Siti Kassim or the Sisters In Islam? He did not respond.

In another FB pages, someone didn’t like something I wrote, and wrote some disparaging remarks of me. I replied, “And I love you too”.

So in conclusion whenever you see defamatory words made against you, say to yourself, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

15

ASSESSMENT OF STAMP DUTY FOR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY FROM THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED TO THE BENEFICIARY

By Roger Lo Ming

1. Introduction When a person died testate or intestate, his estate will be devolved upon his beneficiaries pursuant to the relevant laws such as Probate & Administration Act 1959, Wills Act 1959, Distribution Act 1958, Small Estate (Distribution) Act 1955, National Land Code 1965, etc.

If the deceased’s estate includes land, then the transfer of the land from the deceased’s estate to the beneficiary will attract stamp duty pursuant to the Stamp Act 1949 (“the Stamp Act”).

The process of submitting the instrument of transfer (or memorandum of transfer as commonly referred to by conveyancers) to the Collector of Stamp Duties (“the Collector”) 16

(or commonly referred to as the stamp office) for adjudication of stamp duty pursuant to section 36 of the Stamp Act until a notice of assessment is issued by the Collector can be quite challenging for a conveyancer if the Collector decided to assess the application under a different provision of the Stamp Act which attracts higher stamp duty. In such event, the conveyancer will need to submit a Notice of Objection within 30 days from the date of the notice of assessment pursuant to section 38A of the Stamp Act. When the Notice of Objection is rejected by the Collector, the conveyancer will need to file an appeal with the High Court within 21 days upon the receipt of the Collector’s notification that the Notice of Objection has been rejected.

2. Assessment of Stamp Duty A common issue faced by conveyancers when conducting transfer of the deceased’s property to the beneficiary pursuant to a distribution order (applicable when the deceased died intestate and a Letter of Administration has been issued by a High Court) is that, the instrument of transfer is assessed by the Collector pursuant to Item 32(a) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act which attracts ad valorem duty.

On the other hand, if the transfer of the deceased’s property to the

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

beneficiary is pursuant to a Grant of Probate (applicable when the deceased died testate), the stamp duty payable is the nominal sum of RM10.00.

It is interesting to note that even though the transfer of the deceased’s property to the beneficiary, regardless of whether pursuant to a distribution order or a Grant of Probate, is the same devolution process, the Collector seems to have his own interpretation of the laws and assesses the stamp duty based on different provisions of the Stamp Act. In the recent case of Ch’ng Cheng Siew (suing as administrator of estate of Wong See Yan, deceased) v Pemungut Duti Setem [2016] 7 MLJ 758, the High Court has provided some important guidelines on the assessment of stamp duty in the case of transfer of the deceased’s property to the beneficiary.

The summary of the facts of the case is as follows: 1. The Plaintiff and her late husband (“the Deceased”) were the registered owners of 2 industrial properties (“the said Properties”); 2. The Deceased died intestate on 12-3-2011 leaving behind the Plaintiff and 2 children as the lawful beneficiaries; 3. The Plaintiff applied for the Letters of Administration for

the estate of the Deceased and was granted the same on 30-9-2011;

pursuant to section 39 of the Stamp Act.

4. When the said Properties were ready for distribution, the children decided to renounce their rights over the said Properties leaving the Plaintiff as the sole beneficiary;

The Defendant contended that:

5. On 7-11-2014, the Plaintiff obtained an order pursuant to section 60 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959 to transfer the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties to the Plaintiff; 6. The Plaintiff executed the Memorandum of Transfer (“MOT”) to transfer and vest the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties to the Plaintiff and submitted the same to the Defendant for adjudication of stamp duty; 7. The Defendant issued 2 notices of assessment for the 2 MOT as follows:

First MOT (i) the Plaintiff’s 1/3 share was the nominal stamp duty of RM10.00 (assessed based on Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act); (ii) the children’s 2/3 shares were the ad valorem stamp duty of RM17,770.00 (assessed based on Item 66(c) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act).

Second MOT (i) the Plaintiff’s 1/3 share was the nominal stamp duty of RM10.00 (assessed based on Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act); (ii) the children’s 2/3 shares were the ad valorem stamp duty of RM4,934.00 (assessed based on Item 66(c) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act).

1. since the Deceased passed away intestate, the Plaintiff and her 2 children were entitled to 1/3 share each to the estate of the Deceased pursuant to section 6(1) of the Distribution Act 1958; 2. if the ½ share in the said Properties were to transfer to the Plaintiff and her 2 children in equal shares, the stamp duty payable would be RM10.00 each pursuant to Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act; and 3. when the 2 children renounced their rights of inheritance, their 2/3 interest in the said Properties shall be assessed under Item 66(c) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act, i.e., an inter vivos gift.

The Plaintiff contended that the renunciation of interest by the 2 children resulted in the Plaintiff inherited all the estate of the Deceased was not an inter vivos gift but merely a devolution of interest by operation of law.

Based on the above facts, the High Court decided that: 1) a beneficiary cannot be forced to accept a benefit from an estate; 2) a beneficiary has no interest in the estate until the administration of the estate is completed and distributed; and 3) the stamp duty for the transfer of the properties shall be assessed under Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act.

2.1 A beneficiary cannot be forced to accept a benefit 8. The Plaintiff submitted a notice from an estate

of objection pursuant to section 38A of the Stamp Act objecting to the said assessments; and

9. The Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s objection and the Plaintiff filed an appeal to the High Court

In paragraphs [21] to [24] of the case, the Court accepts and recognises the established laws that: 1. a beneficiary whether under a will or intestacy, cannot be forced to

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

accept a benefit from an estate; 2. when a beneficiary renounces his rights or interest over the benefit, the benefit will pass to other beneficiary entitled to the same by operation of law; 3. once a beneficiary renounces his rights or interest over the benefit, he no longer has any right or title in the benefit and cannot pass it to others as a gift; and 4. therefore, when the 2 children renounced their rights over the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties, they no longer have any interest in the same and cannot pass it to the Plaintiff as a gift.

The Court quoted the following decisions to support its findings: Townson v Tickell (1819) 3 B & ALD 31, Abbott CJ held: The law certainly is not so absurd as to force a man to take an estate against his will...I concur in that opinion, and think that the renunciation here having been by deed under the hand and seal of the party, must have the effect of making the devise with respect to him null and void...The good sense of the thing is quite the other way; the indeed presumes, that the estate devised will be beneficial to the devisee, and that he will accept of it, until there is proof to the contrary.

Here is a renunciation by a most solemn act, viz by deed; and by that he has said, that he did not chose to accept that which is devised to him.

It seems to me, that the effect of that is, that the estate never was with him at all.

In the same case, Holroyd J added that; I think that an estate cannot be forced on a man. A device, however, being prima facie for the devisee’s benefit, he is supposed to assent to it, until he does some act to shew his dissent.

The law presumes that he will assent until the contrary be proved; when the contrary, however, is proved, it shews that he never did assent to the devise, and consequently, that the estate never was with him.

17

In the same case, Best J said that:

next class entitled.

vest in a man not assenting to it; there must be the assent of the party, before an interest in the property can pass to him. It is stated in the declaration, that this party has, by his solemn deed, expressed his dissent, and renounced the estate devised by the will. It appears to me, therefore, that no interest ever vested in him; and, therefore, there is nothing more to be done for the purpose of giving the sole property to the plaintiff.

accept or refuse the benefit in the estate of the Deceased. When they decided to renounce their interest in the estate of the Deceased, the estate of the Deceased will be distributed to the remaining beneficiary pursuant to the Distribution Act, and in this case, the Plaintiff became the sole beneficiary of the estate of the Deceased.

2.3 The stamp duty for the transfer of the properties It seems to be contrary to common Therefore, the Deceased’s 2 children shall be assessed under Item sense to say, that an estate should as the beneficiaries had the right to 32(i)

2.2 A beneficiary has no interest in the estate until the administration of the The Court also quoted In re Scott, estate is completed and decd [1975] 1 WLR 1260 in which distributed Walton J said:

I approach the matter this way.

Disclaimer is a refusal to accept an interest. As the old Year Books had it, nobody can put an estate upon another in spite of this teeth, and here Col Scott and Miss Scott have shown their teeth by executing the deeds of disclaimer. Now, what effect does that have? It seems to me that it leaves the executor of the will still holding the interest attempted to be disposed of under the statute, and still holding it as part of the estate of the deceased. If somebody refuses to accept a slice of the estate of the deceased, then it still remains, in my judgment, a part of the estate of the deceased.

In addition to the above 2 English cases, the Court referred to the text book, the Principles of Australian Succession Law (2007) as follows: A beneficiary under a will, or indeed, under intestacy, cannot be forced to accept the benefit, but may disclaim it. ...A disclaimer does not amount to a disposition of the property (it is treated as never having been acquired by the disclaiming party) it may be made by deed, in writing and by conduct … In the case of intestacy, if a person entitled on the intestacy disclaims the benefit, that benefit will pass to the other members of the class to which the disclaiming beneficiary belonged, and if there are none, then to the 18

The Court rejected the Defendant’s argument that the 2 children had given their 2/3 interest in the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties to the Plaintiff as a gift.

The Court cited the decision of the Federal Court in Chor Phaik Har v Farlim properties Sdn Bhd [1997] 3 MLJ 188 which held that: ...in law a beneficiary under an intestacy has no interest or property in the personal estate of a deceased person until the administration of the latter’s estate is complete and distribution made according to the law of distribution of the intestate estate.

The Court held that the administration and distribution of the Deceased’s estate had yet to be completed and further when the 2 children renounced their rights over the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties, they no longer had any legal rights or interest in the same to make an inter vivos gift to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant had wrongfully determined that the 2 children of the Deceased had transferred their interest in the said Properties to the Plaintiff as a gift and assessed the stamp duty pursuant to Item 66(c) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

The court held that the stamp duty payable for the Memorandum of Transfer of the Deceased’s 1/2 shares in the said Properties to the Plaintiff shall be RM10.00 each pursuant to Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act. Although the Court did not elaborate in details of its decision, such finding is no doubt consistent with the Stamp Act. Section 4(1) of the Stamp Act states: “Subject to this Act and subject to the exemptions contained in this Act and in any written law for the time being in force, the several instruments specified in the First Schedule shall, from and after the commencement of this Act, be chargeable with the several duties specified in such Schedule.”

The First Schedule of the Stamp Act lists out the types of instruments that are chargeable with duty and the amount of the duty.

Transfer of property clearly falls under Item 32 of the First Schedule as it covers “Conveyance, Assignment, Transfer or Absolute Bill of Sale”.

Item 32 has 9 sub-items (i.e. (a) to (i)) which deal with different types of transactions which shall be discussed below: (a) On sale of any property (except stock, shares, marketable securities and accounts receivables or book debts of the kind mentioned in paragraph (c)) Sub-item (a) is applicable to the sale of property pursuant to section 16(1) of the Stamp Act which states that: “Any conveyance or transfer operating as a voluntary disposition inter vivos shall be chargeable with the like stamp duty as if it were a conveyance or transfer on sale.”

Pursuant to Black’s Law Dictionary (7th Edi), “inter vivos” means:

“Of or relating to property conveyed not by will or in contemplation of an imminent death, but during the conveyor’s lifetime.”

Therefore, since the transfer of the Deceased’s ½ share in the said Properties to the Plaintiff was by way of devolution process and not a transaction conducted by 2 living persons, sub-item (a) is clearly not applicable to the above scenario. (b) On sale of any stock, shares or marketable securities, to be computed on the price or value thereof on the date of transfer whichever is the greater - For every RM1,000 or fractional part of RM1,000 Sub-item (b) is only applicable to the sale of stock, shares or marketable securities and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (c) On the absolute sale of any accounts receivables or book debts to a bank, merchant bank, or finance company licensed under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 or under the Islamic Banking Act 1983 or a scheduled institution as defined under section 2 of the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989, pursuant to a factoring agreement.

Sub-item (c) is only applicable to sale of accounts receivables or book debts to banks and financial institutions and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (d) Of any property by way of security or any security other than a marketable security Sub-item (d) is only applicable to conveyance or assignment or transfer of property by way of security and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (e) Of any property as above where the transaction is between trustees and where (i) the beneficial interest in the property passes or (ii) the beneficial interest in the

property does not pass Sub-item (e) is only applicable to transaction conducted by trustees and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (f) Of any property, for the purpose of effectuating the appointment of a new trustee or the retirement of a trustee although no new trustee is appointed Sub-item (f) is only applicable to the appointment or retirement of trustee and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (g) Of any property by way of settlement Sub-item (g) is only applicable to settlement agreement and therefore is not applicable to the above scenario. (h) Of any property by way of gift (whether by way of voluntary disposition or otherwise) Sub-item (h) is only applicable to transfer of property by way of gift.

The Court in Ch’ng Cheng Siew (suing as administrator of estate of Wong See Yan, deceased) v Pemungut Duti Setem had explained that the beneficiary has no interest in the property until it is registered in his name, therefore the beneficiary cannot transfer the property by way of gift. As a result, sub-item (h) is not applicable to the above scenario. (i) Of any kind not otherwise specially charged with duty Sub-item (i) is only applicable to conveyance, assignment or transfer of property which does not fall under any of the sub-items (a) to (h) abovementioned.

Since the transfer of the ½ share in the said Properties to the Plaintiff was by way of devolution process, it is does not fall under any of the sub-items (a) to (h) of Item 32 and leaving sub-item (i) as the only choice under Item 32. The stamp duty payable under sub-item (i) is RM10.00.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

3. Devolution of property in other jurisdictions It is noted that there is no legislation that provides a clear definition of devolution of property in Malaysia.

However, we can seek guidance from other jurisdictions as shown below:

Queensland’s Succession Act 1981, section 45: 45. Devolution of property on death (1) The property to which a deceased person was entitled for an interest not ceasing on his or her death (other than property of which the deceased person was trustee) shall on his or her death and notwithstanding any testamentary disposition devolve to and vest in his or her executor and if more than 1 as joint tenants, or, if there is no executor or no executor able and willing to act, the public trustee.

(2) Upon the court granting probate of the will or letters of administration of the estate of any deceased person the property vested in his or her executor or in the public trustee under the provisions of subsection (1) shall devolve to and vest in the person to whom the grant is made and if more than 1 as joint tenants.

Singapore’s Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (Chapter 61), section 35: 35. (1) All land shall, so far as regards the transmission and devolution thereof on the death of any person in whom it is vested, whether beneficially or on any trust or by way of mortgage, be deemed to be of the nature of chattels real, and accordingly all the like powers for one only of several joint personal representatives, as well as for a single personal representative, and for all the personal representatives together, to dispose of and otherwise deal with the land, shall belong to the deceased’s personal representatives or representative from time to time, with all the like incidents, but 19

subject to all the like rights, equities and obligations as if the land were a chattel real vesting in them or him, and for the purposes of this section the personal representatives for the time being of the deceased shall be deemed in law his heirs and assigns within the meaning of all trusts and powers.

Ontario’s Devolution of Estates Act (Chapter 129), section 2: 2(1) All real and personal property that is vested in a person without a right in any other person to take by survivorship, on his death, whether testate or intestate and notwithstanding any testamentary disposition, devolves to and becomes vested in his personal representative from time to time as trustee for the persons by law beneficially entitled

thereto, and, subject to the payment of his debts and so far as such property is not disposed of by deed, will, contract or other effectual disposition, it shall be administered, dealt with and distributed as if it were personal property not so disposed of.

4. Conclusion It is settled laws that the transfer of a property from an estate to a beneficiary is a devolution process and the stamp duty should be assessed pursuant to Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act. Whether the devolution process is conducted vide Grants of Probate or Letters of Administration and Distribution Order, it does not change the fact that the stamp duty should be assessed pursuant to Item 32(i) of the First Schedule of the Stamp Act.

A conveyancer must appreciate the difference between an inter vivos conveyance/transfer and devolution of property in order to apply the correct provisions of the Stamp Act when submitting documents for adjudication of stamp duty. Failing which, a conveyancer may not be able to protect his client’s interest when the wrong assessment is being issued by the Collector.

It is also high time our legislature should look into the urgent need of amending the existing laws or passing new laws to codify the devolution of property to protect the rights of the parties in the devolution process.

A FORCE TO INVOKE FORCE MAJEURE.

by Syed Zomael Hussain (Azmi & Associates) 21 March, 2020

Introduction On 11 March 2020, coronavirus (“COVID-19”) was officially declared a pandemic by the World Health Organisation (“WHO”).1 COVID-19 has, since December 2019, infected more than 167 countries and over 203,000 individuals worldwide.

The wide spread of COVID-19 has caused global alarm and in the effort to minimize the threat of this pandemic, many countries have advocated and promoted social distancing. We have also witnessed a few countries announcing and imposing “lockdown” to impede the spreading of COVID-19.

As at 16 March 2020, the numbers of COVID-19 cases in Malaysia have increased significantly to a whopping 553 cases with 315 new cases confirmed in the span of two days. These numbers are expected 20

to keep increasing. With the spike in the number of COVID-19 cases in the country, the Prime Minister of Malaysia had, on 16 March 2020, announced the implementation of a movement control order whereby effective 18 March 2020 to 31 March 2020, all government and private premises are ordered to be closed, save for premises and/or businesses falling within the ambit of essential services.2 The spreading of COVID-19 has inevitably caused drawback to businesses. Many businesses are expected to be affected by the implementation of the movement restriction.

As a result, parties to commercial agreements may be unable to perform its obligations under their respective agreements. A question then arises as to whether the defence of force majeure may be invoked to relieve a party from performing its obligations amid COVID-19? The question is especially relevant to an innocent party who is unable to perform its obligations as a result

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, we will provide you with an insight on the laws pertaining to force majeure clauses and the impact of COVID-19 on commercial agreements.

Establishing the Defence of Force Majeure Force majeure means the occurrence of event(s) or circumstance(s) which could not have been foreseen at the time the contract was entered into, which prevents or impedes a party from performing one or more of its contractual obligations under the contract.3 There is no hard and fast rule in the drafting and construction of force majeure clauses, leaving the same to be negotiated between the parties. An effective force majeure clause generally consists of two main components, namely, the description of what constitutes a “force majeure event” and the consequences of the occurrence of a force majeure event.

A well drafted force majeure clause may even contain provision as to the procedures to be complied with by the party relying on such force majeure clause upon the occurrence of a force majeure event.

There are a few aspects that must be taken into consideration prior to the invoking a force majeure clause.

Among the considerations are: (a) whether there is a force majeure clause in the contract?; (b) whether the event falls within the scope of the force majeure clause?; (c) whether the occurrence of the force majeure event is foreseeable at the time of conclusion of the contract?; (d) whether performance is rendered impossible by the force majeure event?; and (e) whether the pre-requisites and/ or procedures as set out in the contract have been fulfilled?

The above considerations are further discussed and elaborated in this article.

Can Force Majeure Clause be Implied into a Contract?

The Contracts Act 1950 does not provide for implied terms. It is trite that where a contract is in writing, the intention of the parties must be found within the four walls of the contractual documents. The same was upheld by the Court of Appeal in the case of BIG Industrial Gas Sdn Bhd v Pan Wijaya Property Sdn Bhd and Another Appeal.4 As such, force majeure clause can only be invoked and relied upon where it is explicitly set out in a contract. The law provides that non-performance due to the occurrence of any extraneous event obstructing the performance of a party having no control over such event cannot be excused in the absence of a force majeure clause.

To put it simply, the defence of force majeure would be inapplicable where a contract makes no provision for it.

Where parties to a contract intend to excuse performance of obligations for reasons beyond the control of the parties, the same shall be set out in the contract. The absence of such clause would mean that the parties have no intention whatsoever of relieving any one of them from their obligations upon the occurrence of certain events. Therefore, the parties cannot plead force majeure when it is not available in the contract.

Further, Malaysian Courts have refused to imply force majeure clauses into a contract where the contract is silent on the same. In the case of Muhammad Radhieddeen bin Abdul Khalid v Saujana Triangle Sdn Bhd,5 the High Court cited with approval the Singapore case of Magenta Resources (S) Pte. Ltd. v. China Resources (S) Pte. Ltd.6 which held that there can be no general rule as to what constitutes a situation of force majeure. Whether such force majeure situation arises, and where it does arise, the rights and obligations that follow, would all depend on what the parties have provided for in their contract.

Does COVID-19 qualify as a Force Majeure Event?

The decisive point in determining whether COVID-19 qualifies as a force majeure event is the construction and language of the force majeure clause in the contract.

Some force majeure clauses provide for an exhaustive definition which spells out all the categories of events that will trigger the application of the clause. Some provide for a broad definition covering all events or circumstances beyond the control of the party seeking to rely on the clause. Another approach is a hybrid of the exhaustive definition and the broad definition whereby the definition provides for a list of categories of events amounting to force majeure events, followed by a catch all provision and vice versa.

The law provides that an agreement must be construed by the words used in the agreement. This rule was upheld by the Federal Court in the case of CIMB Bank Bhd v Anthony

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Lawrence Bourke & Anor.7 The Federal Court further held that the court is not empowered to improve upon the instrument which it is called upon to construct. Further, it is an established principle of law that a party relying upon a force majeure clause must prove the facts bringing the case within the clause. In the case of Intan Payong Sdn Bhd v Goh Saw Chan Sdn Bhd,8 the High Court cited Chitty on Contracts, 28th Edition Vol.1 Page 273 – 274 which provides that, “it is trite that a party relying upon a force majeure clause must prove the facts bringing the case within the clause. He must therefore prove the occurrence of one of the events referred to in the clause and that he has been prevented, hindered or delayed, as that case may be from performing the contract by reason of the event. He must further prove that his non performance was due to circumstances beyond his control and that there were no reasonable steps that he could have taken to avoid or mitigate the event or its consequence”.

If the force majeure clause expressly lists “disease”, “outbreak” or “global health emergency” as force majeure events, the COVID-19 pandemic may fall within such category and may qualify as a force majeure event. Where the contract does not provide for such specific instances, COVID-19 may still be arguably fall within the scope of force majeure events where the force majeure clause covers “acts of God”, “acts of government”, “events beyond the control of the parties” or “events making it impossible for parties to fulfill their contractual obligations”.

At the very least, COVID-19 shall qualify as a force majeure event within the ambit of “events beyond the control of the parties” as the parties have no control whatsoever on the occurrence, spreading of COVID-19 and/or the government’s imposition of the movement control order. Further, the occurrence of a force majeure event must be unforeseeable at the time of conclusion and execution of the contract. Where the occurrence of an event is foreseeable, parties would be expected to mitigate the same and such an event would most 21

Impossibility of Performance by the Occurrence of the F orce Majeure Event In order to successfully rely on the defence of force majeure, a party relying on a force majeure clause must prove that the occurrence of one of the events referred to in the clause has prevented, hindered or delayed the party from performing its obligations under the contract.

He must further prove that his non-performance was due to circumstances beyond his control and that there were no reasonable steps that he could have taken to avoid or mitigate the event or its consequence.

It would be right to say that a party invoking the defence of force majeure must demonstrate the link between the non- performance and the force majeure event. He must show that the performance of his obligation(s) as stipulated in the contract has been rendered impossible as a result of the occurrence of the force majeure event and that such non-performance would not have become impossible but for the occurrence of the force majeure event.

Fulfilment of Procedures Set Out in the Contract Some contracts may require for certain procedures to be followed upon the triggering of the force majeure event. The requirements to be fulfilled in the event of force majeure may differ from one contract to another. Typically, the party relying on such clause would be required to serve a notice notifying 22

the other party of the occurrence of such event. Parties to a contract shall in good faith perform and fulfill all the requirements as set out in the contract to successfully plead force majeure. Failure to fulfill the pre-requisites and procedures set out in the contract for the purpose of reliance to a force majeure clause may deny a party from successfully invoking such clause.

Conclusion With the fulfilment of the procedures for invoking force majeure and the successful establishment of force majeure, a party relying on such clause may be relived from performing its obligations under the contract, including having the right to exercise termination of the contract (subject to the terms of the contract) and may also be relieved from any claim for damages and/or liabilities.

Invoking force majeure clause is one of the ways by which parties to an agreement may relieve themselves from performing their obligations at the time of COVID-19. Parties to a contract which does not contain a force majeure clause or where the force majeure clause does not cover events such as COVID-19, may rely on alternative defences such as material adverse change/effect or the doctrine of frustration.

It may be worthwhile for affected businesses to consider seeking appropriate legal advisory on their existing contracts.

For further information, please contact: Syed Hussain, Azmi & Associates zomael@azmilaw.com 1- WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 11 March 2020.

2 - Special Message from the Prime Minister on COVID-19 dated 16 March 2020.

3 - International Chamber of Commerce (2018), “Hardship and Force Majeure in International Commercial Contracts: Dealing with unforeseen events in a changing world�.

4 - [2018] 3 MLJ 326 5 - [2017] MLJU 950 6 - [1996] 3 SLR 62 7 - [2019] 2 MLJ 1 8 - [2004] 1 LNS 537

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

likely fall outside of the ambit of a force majeure clause and the defence of force majeure will not be available.

Considering that the COVID-19 pandemic was unforeseeable prior to its outbreak in December 2019, non-performance of contractual obligations for contracts entered into prior to the outbreak may be excused through the defence of force majeure, subject to the provisions of the contract.

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS COURSE On 8th & 9th January 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised the Ethics and Professional Standards Course that was attended by 70 pupils. The Ethics briefing was conducted by Pn. Hendon Mohamed, Bar Council PSDC Committee. Senior members of the Bar exposed the pupils to various aspects of practice such as maintenance of client account, conduct with clients, courts and fellow lawyers, and the good values of practice at the Bar. The following day was the examination, and the course ended with a formal dinner with the masters and members of the Bar at Grand Paragon Hotel, Johor Bahru. The Guest Speaker at the dinner was Mr. Ibrahim Bin Hashim, who shared his experiences at the Bar.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

23

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 24

PICTURES AT PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS COURSE DINNER

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

CIVIL ADVOCACY COURSE

On 25th & 26th January 2019, the Bar Council Advocacy Training Committee in collaboration with the Johore Bar Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee held the Civil Advocacy Course for members of the Johore Bar. The course was conducted at the Muar Court Complex. A total of 24 members participated and the participants were divided into groups of six with two trainers per group. The trainers were Alan Wong Teck Wei, Andrew Heng, Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad, Brendan Navin Siva, Jaspal Singh, Michelle Loi, Ravi Nekoo, Shahareen Begum and Syahredzan Johan.

CHRISTMAS OPEN HOUSE CELEBRATIONS

On 23rd January 2019, the Johore Bar organized open house for members of the Johore Bar and pupils at Johor Bahru and Muar respectively to celebrate the Christmas festival.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

25

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

49TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE JOHORE BAR On 22nd February 2019, the Johore Bar’s 49th Annual General Meeting (“AGM”) was held at Berjaya Waterfront Hotel, Johor Bahru. 271 members attended. Mr Roger Lo Ming was elected as the Chairman of the Johore Bar and Ms. Santhi Balachandran as the representative to the Bar Council.

Ten Committee members were elected namely Mr Andrew Wong, Pn Shahareen Begum binti Abdul Subhan, Mr Hardip Singh, Hajah Norfaizah binti Hj Zainuddin, Dr Wendy Ooi Su Ghee, Mr Danny Loo Kheng Soon, Cik Aimi Syarizad binti Datuk Hj Kuthubul Zaman, En Mohd Fazaly Ali bin Mohd Ghazaly, Cik Noor Atiqah binti Mohd Thaib Teoh and Cik Anis Syarizad binti Datuk Hj Kuthubul Zaman. Mr Lim Eng Siang and En Fadhil Ihsan bin Mohamad Hassan were co-opted as committee members. Ms S Sharimilathevy was appointed as the Honorary Secretary.

26

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

27

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 28

9TH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE JOHORE BAR

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

29

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 30

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

31

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 32

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

33

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 34

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

35

JOHORE BAR ANNUAL DINNER & DANCE 2019

SPEECH BY THE JOHORE BAR CO The guest of honour Mr George Varughese President of the Malaysian Bar, Yang Arif Justice Puan See Mee Chun Senior Judge of the High Court in Johor Bahru, Yang Arif Tuan Mohd Ivan bin Hussien Judicial Commissioner of the High Court in Johor Bahru, Chairman of the Industrial Court Yang Arif Puan Sumathi Murugiah, Vice President of the Malaysian Bar Dato’ Abdul Fareed Abdul Ghafoor, Past Presidents of the Malaysian Bar Dato Yeo Yang Poh and Dato Khutubul Zaman, friends from professional bodies, members of the Johore Bar and distinguished guests

Good evening and welcome to the Annual Dinner & Dance of the Johore Bar. I was introduced by the MC just now as the Chairman of the Johore Bar. I am actually the ex-chairman. My term as chair ended yesterday at our annual general meeting whence the new chairman and committee for the incoming term was appointed. But more on that later.

The Johore Bar Committee is a statutory body under s. 73 of the Legal Profession Act 1976. Our responsibility amongst others to promote and safeguard the interests of the 2,176 lawyers in Johore, provide amenities for and to promote welfare of the members. We are the 3rd largest state Bar in the country and part of the Malaysian Bar – our parent body.

Our membership comes from different race and religion – and we have differences of opinion – but we must stand united as members of the Malaysian Bar sharing ideologies, values and principles of the Bar namely independence, courage against the powers that be, free from external interference, equality and unity. It is those values and principles that has defined the Malaysian Bar and brought it the worldwide recognition and respect that it enjoys today. We will not allow those values and principles from being chipped away from the Malaysian Bar. Ladies and gentleman, The guest of honour, President of the Malaysian Bar Mr George Varughese, thank you for accepting our invitation. The Johore Bar is honoured by your presence.

George will soon be completing his term as the President. I have had the privilege of serving at the Bar Council under the presidency of George for the last 2 years. It was time well spent. George continued to uphold the values and principles of the Bar despite the challenges that came his way as the figurehead of the Malaysian Bar. It was challenging enough under the previous government and became more challenging after the general election as the Bar seeks to ensure that the new government stay true to its promise of upholding the rule of law.

36

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

As with our earlier presidents George also took the effort to address members practice issues.

George understood that whilst it is necessary to continue to fight the cause of rule of law, members practical problems – the bread and butter issues must also be dealt with expeditiously so that the Bar Council remains connected and relevant to its members; otherwise the Bar Council will exist in vacuum.

Anis Syarizad.

George’s work over the years at the Small Firms Practice Committee is well known. There were several initiatives taken by him there and subsequently pushed through when he became the President. One of it is perhaps the conception and implementation of his baby the Group Law Practice Model for Small Firms that has become the potential game changer for small law firms.

At the AGM yesterday, we elected a new Chairman, Bar Representative and committee.

May I now introduce the new Chairman of the Johore Bar – Mr Roger Lo Ming and the new Bar Rep Ms Santhi.

Many a times, the Johore Bar Committee was able to address our issues effectively because of the personal attention given by him – despite managing 18,000 members across the peninsular.

So, thank you Mr George Varughese for all your good work for the Bar. The Johore Bar wishes you a happy retirement from the Bar soon.

On the same note the Johore Bar hopes that your successor will also serve with equal, if not more, commitment to the values and principles of the Malaysian Bar and remain loyal to the ideologies of the Bar. Ladies and gentleman, I was given the honour to lead the Johore Bar by the members. It was a heavy burden. However, my burden was made much lighter by the wonderful support of my committee members. They are the unseen hands that carried the Johore Bar with me.

At this juncture I would like to express my gratitude to the committee members who despite their work and personal challenges had come forward to serve the Bar. They all deserve recognition from us. Please join me in giving a round of applause to the following members of my Committee: Lim Eng Siang, Shahareen, Mohan, Santhi, Punitha, Roger Lo, Danny Loo, Allen Loh, Aimi Syarizad, Khairul Asri, Fadhil Ihsan, Norfaizah and our secretary

I must also put on record my appreciation to our senior member Bar Representative Mr S Gunasegaran for his guidance to the Committee.

He has contributed to the Bar for many years and is now taking his leave. On behalf of the Johore Bar I would like to thank Mr Guna for his years of commitment and service to the Bar.

To the new committee – continue to improve on what your predecessors have done and correct where we may have mistepped. Always be guided by the values and principles of the Bar. And hold tight to it.

YA Puan See Mee Chun and YA Tuan Ivan are here representing the judiciary. The Johore Bar appreciates the co-operation and understanding from the Judiciary and in particular the Courts in Johore to our concerns and issues. We have always had a close relationship with the courts. I have no doubt that this will continue under the stewardship of our new committee.

Dear guests, We have lined up a pleasant evening for you.

This would not have been possible without the good work of the organizing committee led by Aimi Syarizad and Meneka and the secretariat staff, thank you ladies. You have done a splendid job. Thank you as well to all members who have supported us in many ways.

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

E CHAIRMAN OF THE OMMITTEE 2018/2019

The secretariat staff – Siti, Cicelia, Huda, Suhaimi and Rosita – I am thankful for your good work and dedication at the secretariat in serving the Bar. Enjoy the dinner and your fellowship. Good night, Thank you.

R. Jayabalan | Chairman Johore Bar Committee 2018/19

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

37

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 38

CHINESE NEW YEAR OPEN HOUSE On 21st March 2019, the Johore Bar organized the open house for members of the Johore Bar and pupils at Johor Bahru and Muar respectively to celebrate the Chinese New Year festival.

LAW AWARENESS CAMPAIGN

On 30th and 31st March 2019, the Legal Aid Sub Committee in collaboration with the Rotary Club organised the two-day Law Awareness Campaign at Aeon Mall Tebrau City, Johor Bahru.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

13TH JOHORE BAR FUTSAL TOURNAMENT

The 13th edition of the Bar annual futsal tournament was held on 27th April 2019 at Sports Prima Pandan with participation of five teams. The Challenge Trophy was won by the ‘Irka Rekhan & Aizuddin (I.R.A)’ team. The event was concluded with prize giving ceremony and lunch.

SEMINAR ON PROFITS FROM DISPOSAL OF REAL PROPERTY: CHARGEABLE GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME On 30th and 31st March 2019, the Legal Aid Sub Committee in collaboration with the Rotary Club organised the two-day Law Awareness Campaign at Aeon Mall Tebrau City, Johor Bahru.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

39

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 40

COURTESY CALL ON THE JUDGES AND JUDICIAL COMMISSIONERS OF THE HIGH COURT AT JOHOR BAHRU The Johore Bar Committee took office after the AGM on 22nd February 2019. The new Committee paid a courtesy call on the Judges and Judicial Commissioners of the High Court in Johor Bahru and Muar on 21st March 2019, 2nd May 2019 and 23rd May 2019 respectively.

JOHORE BAR INFORMAL HIGH-TEA AT MUAR On 30th and 31st March 2019, the Legal Aid Sub Committee in collaboration with the Rotary Club organised the two-day Law Awareness Campaign at Aeon Mall Tebrau City, Johor Bahru.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

SEMINAR ON STATUTE OF ROME, ROLE OF ICC AND SOVEREIGNTY OF MALAYSIA On 16th May 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on Statute of Rome, Role of ICC and Sovereignty of Malaysia presented by Mr Srimurugan Alagan.

SEMINAR ON ADVOCACY, COURT ROOM ETIQUETTE AND ETHICS On 24th May 2019, the Young Lawyers And Chambering Pupils And Continuing Professional Development Sub Committees organised a seminar on Advocacy, Court Room Etiquette and Ethics: from the Perspective of a Former Practitioner – Retired Judge presented by Dato’ Varghese George. A total of 51 persons attended the seminar.

IFTHAR @ BATU PAHAT

On 24th May 2019, an Ifthar was organised by the North Johor Affairs Sub Committee at Crystal Inn, Batu Pahat Johor.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

41

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 42

SEMINAR ON LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR ISLAMIC FINANCING

On 18th June 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on legal documentation for Islamic Financing presented by En Megat Hizaini. A total of 73 persons attended the seminar.

JOHORE BAR INFORMAL HIGH-TEA AT MUAR On 24th June 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on conveyance – from buy to bequeath at KSL Hotel & Resorts, Johor Bahru. Eleven speakers were involved for the seminar namely YP Cheong, Wan Mansor bin Wan Mohamed, Elison Wong, Jal Othman, Kalathevy Sivagnanam, Zemilah bt Mohd Noor, Datuk Roger Tan, Andrew Wong Fook Hin, Nicholas Chang Chen Seng, Farah Deba bt Mohamed Sofian and Carolyn Oh Li Lin. A total of 124 persons attended the seminar

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

SEMINAR ON LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR ISLAMIC FINANCING

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

43

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES 44

HARI RAYA AIDILFITRI OPEN HOUSE On 20th June 2019, the Johore Bar hosted Hari Raya Aidilfitri open house at Johor Bahru and Muar respectively for members of the Bar and pupils in chambers.

CPD PRIME

On 25th July 2019, the Bar Council Professional Standards And Development Committee organised a CPD Prime at Johore Bar on topics of Land Law and Winding Up presented by Ms Lee Peck Ha and Ms Cindy Kiu.

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS COURSE

On 29th & 31st July 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised the Ethics and Professional Standards Course that was attended by 32 pupils. Senior members of the Bar exposed the pupils to various aspects of practice such as maintenance of client account, conduct with clients, courts and fellow lawyers, and the good values of practice at the Bar. The following day was the examination, and the course ended with a formal dinner with masters and members of the Bar at KSL Hotels & Resorts, Johor Bahru. The guest speaker at the dinner was Ms Serene Ong, who shared her experience at the Bar.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

WELCOMING HIGH TEA IN HONOUR OF YA TUAN AWANG ARMADAJAYA BIN AWANG MAHMUD, YA DR SHAHNAZ BINTI SULAIMAN AND YA PUAN EVROL MARIETTE PETERS On 11th July 2019, the Social Sub Committee organised a high tea at Grand Paragon Hotel Johor Bahru, to welcome YA Tuan Awang Armadajaya, YA Dr Shahnaz and YA Puan Evrol Mariette Peters, three newly posted Judicial Commissioners to the Johor Bahru High Court. The event was attended by 100 members of the Johore Bar.

HARI RAYA AIDILFITRI OPEN HOUSE

On 12th July 2019, the Young Lawyers And Chambering Pupils and Continuing Professional Development Sub Committees organised a workshop on civil trial preparatory work, presented by Mr Ravi Nekoo. A total of 91 persons attended the workshop.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

45

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

WORKSHOP ON PROCEDURAL LAWS AND PRACTICAL ISSUES ON FAMILY LAW

On 26th July 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a workshop on procedural laws and practical issues on family law presented by Ms Pushpa Ratnam and Mr Ravi Nekoo. A total of 68 persons attended the seminar.

EMINAR ON PREPARING FOR A COURT OF APPEAL HEARING

On 8th August 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on preparing for a Court of Appeal hearing presented by Mr G K Ganesan. A total of 60 persons attended the seminar.

TWO DAY PROGRAMME ON EXECUTIVE CERTIFICATE IN ISLAMIC FINANCE

On 19th & 20th Aug 2019, the Bar Council Islamic Finance Committee and INCEIF organised a two day programme on Executive Certificate in Islamic Finance held at KSL Hotel & Resorts, Johor Bahru.

The speakers were Prof Dr Younes Soualhi and Mr Ahmad Lutfi Abdull Mutalip. A total of 23 persons attended the seminar.

46

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

SEMINAR ON SOLICITOR’S NEGLIGENCE On 15th Aug 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on solicitor’s negligence presented by Mr S Gunasegaran and Mr George Neo. A total of 60 persons attended the seminar.

SEMINAR ON DEALING WITH DISCIPLINARY BOARD COMPLAINTS – HOW TO DEFEND YOURSELF On 16th Aug 2019, the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on dealing with Disciplinary Board Complaints – How to defend yourself presented by Mr Krishna Dallumah. A total of 41 persons attended the seminar.

MEMBERS DIALOGUE WITH OFFICE BEARERS OF THE BAR COUNCIL ON 20 AUG 2019

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

47

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

REFERENCE PROCEEDINGS In Memoriam

We record with deep regret the passing of the following members of the Johore Bar;

— — — — —

Ravichandran a/l Sinnapah Daud bin Asmoni Balarajah s/o Subramaniam Norashirin binti Sulaiman Roy Rajasingam a/l C Vallipuram

A Reference in their memory was held at the Johor Bahru High Court on Tuesday 20th August 2019.

The proceedings were presided over by the Honourable Justice Datuk See Mee Chun. Senior Federal Counsel Tuan Haji Jailani bin Rahman represented the Attorney General’s Chambers and Datuk Abdul Fareed bin Abdul Gafoor, President of the Malaysian Bar. Members of the Bar and family members of the five departed members were present. The proceedings was followed by a reception at conference room.

SPEECH BY MR ROGER LO MING, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR May it please the Court, my name is Roger Lo and I appear for the Johore Bar Committee.

My learned friend, Dato’ Abdul Fareed bin Abdul Gafoor the President of the Malaysian Bar is representing the Bar Council and Senior Federal Counsel Tuan Haji Jailani bin Rahman is representing the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

My learned friends, En. Mohd Rasheed bin Hassan, En. Badrol Hisham bin Mohd Sani, Mr. Sila Dass, En. Ismail bin Mohd Tahir and Ms. Chandrika will appear to recite the tributes to the departed members respectively.

I would also like to acknowledge the presence of the members of the Bar, relatives and friends of the departed members at the gallery to witness these solemn proceedings.

My Lady, We are here to pay tribute to the memory of our 5 departed members of the Johore Bar and to express our heartfelt condolences. They are: The late, Ravichandran A/L Sinnappah The late, Daud Bin Asmoni

48

The late, Balarajah S/O Subramaniam The late, Norashirin Binti Sulaiman The late, Roy Rajasingam A/L C Vallipuram My Lady, On behalf of the Johore Bar, I would like to place on record our appreciation to Your Ladyship for agreeing to preside over today’s Reference Proceedings for our departed members. Reference Proceedings is an ancient tradition of the Bar and is unique to the legal profession. We welcome our new members when they are called to the Bar, we pay tribute to our members when they are departed.

My Lady, I have been given the honour and privilege to say a few words and move these Reference Proceedings on behalf of the Johore Bar. I would like to express my gratitude to the Court, the Attorney-General’s Chamber and my learned friends for supporting and upholding this meaningful tradition of the Bar.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Roger Lo Ming | Chairman, Johore Bar

DATUK ABDUL FAREED BIN ABDUL GAFOOR, PRESIDENT OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR Dengan izin Yang Arif, Abdul Fareed bin Abdul Gafoor, mewakili Majlis Peguam Malaysia, dan Bar Malaysia, rakan bijaksana saya Roger Lo Ming hadir bagi pihak Jawatankuasa Badan Peguam Johor, dan Tuan Haji Jailani Bin Rahman, hadir bagi Yang Berbahagia Peguam Negara Malaysia.

Yang Arif, saya dengan hormatnya memohon kebenaran untuk meneruskan ucapan saya dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lady, I am obliged.

My Lady, On behalf of the Bar Council and the Malaysian Bar, I join my learned friend Roger Lo Ming, Chairman of the Johore Bar Committee, in thanking Your Ladyship for graciously agreeing to preside over today’s Reference Proceedings for five departed Members of the Malaysian Bar, who were also Members of the Johore Bar Committee.

Reference proceedings are important and solemn occasions. The three branches of the legal community – those concerned with the administration of justice, namely, the Judiciary, the Attorney General’s Chambers and the Bar – gather to collectively honour departed Members of our community.

Through reference proceedings, we pay tribute to the many and varied accomplishments and contributions made over time by our departed fellow members of the legal profession. As a professional community, it is only at the Bar that we welcome every new Member with a ceremonial admission or Call, and upon their crossing of the bar, we gather to remember them.

As a community of learned and professional Members, we take on, from the moment we adorn our robes, ethical and professional duties that exact on us personally a higher calling both in our service as lawyers and as members of our civic society.

It is said that the legal profession is an honourable one. Members of the legal profession bear a heavy responsibility from the day they don the lawyer’s robe that serves as the hallmark of the profession, ascribing to a strict code of ethics in the manner of conduct in society. Those who possess knowledge of the law and who are trained in the law have an opportunity and duty to play a unique role. Lawyers do not merely advise clients. They are social commentators with an essential and integral role in shaping the destiny of society, not just materially, but also in the areas of justice and equity. We are steadfast in our view that every society must be governed by the rule of law. Every human must enjoy human rights, fundamental freedoms and civil liberties. In this respect, every member of the legal profession is entrusted and commanded by statute to uphold the cause of justice even in the face of adversity. Our motto declares, “No fear. No favour.”

In this regard, the Malaysian Bar has a strong tradition in upholding and defending these values that we hold so dear. There is both explicit and implicit recognition that there is an extent of public interest in the work that our Members do. To quote from the citation for the Malaysian Bar for the United Nations Malaysia Organization of the Year Award 2012, “The Malaysian public has come to know [the Malaysian Bar] and look towards it for guidance on what the law is, what the law should be, and what the law must never be.”

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

My Lady, We have just heard today the Chairman of the Johore Bar Committee, and will hear other Members of the Bar, pay tribute to the Members who sadly have left us. I wish to convey the Malaysian Bar’s deepest condolences to their families, friends and loved ones. We can only imagine your pain and grief, and the continuing void and vacuum in your lives. We share your sadness for our Members who are no more, and cherish the warm fellowship that we had with them at the Bar. Through the untimely demise of these five Members, we have lost over 100 years of legal study and experience.

Together we have lost five upstanding Members of the Bar who have in their own ways contributed both to the profession and the society in which they formed a part. The work that the Malaysian Bar performs, and the respect that it commands, is possible only because of such Members who constitute the Malaysian Bar, both past and present, who have worked tirelessly and contributed so generously to upholding the values that we hold so dear. We will hear and remember today of their strong character and good deeds. In particular I recall the service of the late Balarajah s/o Subramaniam in various capacities, including as Chairman to the Johore Bar Committee, and also as a State Bar representative to the Bar Council between the years of 1990 and 2011.

We only hope that the trails they have blazed will inspire and pave the way for future generations of society and the Bar as we strive for fairness, justice, and the rule of law. In this regard, today’s reference proceedings seeks to recognise, as a matter of formal record, the lives of these departed Members, for posterity. We have not forgotten the late Ravichandran a/l Sinnappah, 49

Allahyarham Daud bin Asmoni, the late Balarajah s/o Subramaniam, Allahyarham Norashirin binti Sulaiman, and the late Roy Rajasingam a/l C Vallipuram. We are here to honour them even though their time with us has come to an end. Their passing is a great loss to the Malaysian Bar.

the chambered under the tutelage of the late Mr Sagadeva, a former Johore Bar Chairman and a fine gentleman, well respected by members of the Bar. He was called to the Malaysian Bar on 20 March 1996.

My Lady, May I conclude by dedicating the following poem by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, titled “Crossing the Bar” in the memory of our departed Members: “Sunset and evening star, And one clear call for me!

My Lady,

And may there be no moaning of the bar, When I put out to sea,

First and foremost I wish to record my and the late Mr S Ravichandran’s family’s appreciation to this Honourable Court for today’s event,

But such a tide as moving seems asleep, Too full for sound and foam, When that which drew from out the boundless deep Turns again home.

My Lady,

Twilight and evening bell, And after that the dark!

And may there be no sadness of farewell, When I embark; For tho› from out our bourne of Time and Place The flood may bear me far, I hope to see my Pilot face to face When I have crost the bar.”

My Lady, may I now respectfully support the motion for the record of these proceedings to be preserved in the archives of this Honourable Court, and a copy thereof be forwarded to each of the families of the said departed Members.

I am obliged to My Lady.

Abdul Fareed Abdul Gafoor President, Malaysian Bar

50

I and the family wish to thank the Johor Bar too for organizing this.

We are gathered here to commemorate Mr RAVICHANDRAN A/L SINNAPPAH who I personally have the honour to call a partner, a friend and a neighbour.

Had he been around today, he would have celebrated his 55th birthday last week on 14 August. He passed on on 31 March 2018 at the age of 53. He succumbed to an aggressive form of renal cancer.

Mr S Ravichandran was a Johor Bahru boy born into a family of teachers, the late Mr Sinnappah Segamoney and the late Madam Lalithabai Vadiveloo.

Being so, he was steered towards a life as a teacher too but he had other plans.

He went to the famous English College for his secondary school and then studied law at ATC College in Kuala Lumpur and procured his LLB Honours Degree from the University of London. He did his CLP and then

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Mr S Ravichandran met his lovely wife, Madam Sunita Sothi in practise and got married on 1 June 1997. They are blessed with 2 boys, Vinnesh and Kavinraj, now ages 20 and 18 respectively. The younger son and Madam Sunita are in court today but his elder son could not make it as he is currently studying. His sister Dr Neeta Devi Kang too could not make it today as she is currently working overseas.

Mr S Ravichandran started his legal practise in the firm of ROZINAH NIZARUDDIN, S GUNAPATI & CO but before long in 1997 joined my firm, M/s CHOR PEE ANWARUL & COMPANY. He was a litigator and had appeared in all levels of the Courts. He was friendly with everyone and always had a smile on his face. He would assist anyone who required assistance or advice on any legal matters, especially fellow members of the Bar. He was a man of few words but once he becomes your friend, you will be his teh tarik buddy and he will be there for you if you need him.

Ravi loves to cook and he will be busy in the kitchen when he had relatives or friends over at his house. However, he was not into sports. But he loves to unwind listening to good music.

He and his beloved wife were regular attendees for Johore Bar functions and during their younger days, were very active in the Johore Bar, especially the Social Sub Committee.

Him, me and a Chinese friend, Mr

08/07/1995–08/04/1996, Chambered under Christian Chandra Aiyathurai under the firm of CC Aiyathurai & Co in Segamat 10/05/1996, Admitted as the Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya

Ravi was also my partner in my firm till 2011 when he decided to join his lovely wife at M/s ZAID IBRAHIM & CO. He was with that firm till the day he departed.

Despite moving to another firm, we would still meet as our houses are near each other at Taman Suria Muafakat. In looking back at our friendship of more than 20 years, in all these years, I have never seen Ravi lose his temper or speak ill of anyone. He always takes things as they come and was always calm.

Even news of his sickness, discovered only in late 2017 was not made known to many people.

His reason was that he did not want people to be worried of him. Also, he sincerely believed that he could fight it out. But, that was not to be.

It had been my privilege to have him as a friend and forever, I will remember him.

Therefore, I hereby offer my deepest condolences to the family of Mr. S Ravichandran, to Sunita and boys, other family members, colleagues and friends.

Also, I humbly request that a record of this proceeding be preserved in the archives of this Court and a copy thereof is given to his widow and children.

M Rasheed Hassan Member of Johore Bar

May it please Yang Arif, I’ve been given the privilege on behalf of the Johor Bar Committee to say a few words in remembrance and honor of a member of the Johor Bar Allahyarham Daud Bin Asmoni who passed away on 26/12/2018.

The biodata of Arwah is as follows:26/04/1962, Daud Asmoni was born in Singapore. He was named after the road that he was born (Jalan Daud).

1981, Early education in Singapore where he sat for his ‘A’ level exam at St Andrew Junior College 1981–1984, joined the Singapore Police Force serving as the Inspector of Police.

1984–1988, Admitted to International Islamic University to read law graduating with a 2nd class degree (upper).

1990–1995, Employed as a law lecturer at Universiti Teknologi MARA. 30/04/1994, Married to Azlina Binti Wan Mat. Blessed with 7 wonderful children. 4 daughters 3 sons

01/06/1996–31/12/1999, Legal Assistant to the legal firm of CC Aiyathurai & Co in Segamat 01/01/2000–31/05/2005, Became junior partner CC Aiyathurai & Co 01/06/2006–31/12/2009, Partner in the legal firm of Dris Wahari & Daud Asmoni in Segamat in charge of the Segamat branch.

However due to the indiscretion and malpractice of his partner, Arwah could not renew his practicing certificate from 2010 onwards.

30/11/2018, Vindicated and got back his practicing certificate after 8 years wait

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

James Pang, a very Muhibbah trio indeed even made a trip to Tokyo together to enjoy the Sakura blooming in April 2009.

That will be one of the best memory I have of him.

26/12/2018, Passed away from diabetes I have known Arwah in 1985 while studying for a law degree at the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur. I was then a 1st year student and Arwah was a 2nd year student.

We have a few things in common which drew us together closer.

Like Arwah I came from Singapore. Being my senior Arwah offered advice and guidance on university studies and life. We played together in the university soccer team.

Arwah was strong physically,

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

51

well build and played very well as a central defender for the team. I can still recall the games we played together against other university teams whether friendlies or yearly competition. Arwah introduced me to mountain climbing.

Arwah was good at organizing anything. In 1988 Arwah organized an expedition of undergraduates to scale Gunung Ledang. Although there was opposition from certain quarters, Arwah managed to convince the university to sponsor the trip. The university allowed a limited number of undergraduates to join the expedition and I was among the privileged few at the insistent of Arwah. Arwah was always helpful and friendly towards everyone. I do not know of anyone who has spoken badly of Arwah.

Arwah was a good lawyer, husband, friend and a good man. Arwah’s health deteriorated subsequently due to diabetes. His sudden passing on Wednesday 26th of December nevertheless came as a shock. He was only 56 years old. We have lost a good friend and his family a good father and husband. His goodness will long live in our memory.

May Allah bless his soul and offers absolute forgiveness. On behalf of the Johor Bar I offer our condolences to the family of Arwah. In conclusion I request that the notes of the proceeding be kept in the High Court archive and a copy extended to the family.

Thank you.

Badrol Hisham Bin Mohamed Sani Member of the Johore Bar

St. Joseph’s Primary School, and from there went to St. Joseph’s Secondary School. He was an Interactor at St. Joseph’s in 1964. He then proceeded to England to pursue a career at law. He was admitted as a Barrister-at-law of the Honourable Society of Middle Temple in 1969.

May it please you My Lady & My Lord, The Chairman of the Johore Bar, Mr Roger Lo Ming, Datuk Abdul Fareed bin Abdul Gafoor, President of the Malaysian Bar, The Representative of Attorney-General Chambers,

the

Tuan Haji Jailani Bin Rahman.

We are gathered here this morning to pay tribute to the memory of the late Balarajah s/o Subramaniam, popularly known as Bala or Balarajah within the legal fraternity. His was one of the most popular names associated with the Johor State Bar since early seventies; be it in the field of Johore State Bar Committee’s administration, or relating the development of legal literature. So much so the name Balarajah became synonymous with the Johor State Bar. Balarajah was born on 16th February 1947 in Muar. His father Kandiah Subramaniam, fondly known as Telekom Maniam, was an employee in Telekoms. His mother Maniccam was a housewife. Telekom Maniam’s family had seven children, and Balarajah was the fourth.

52

On returning to Johore Bahru, he did his pupillage with the late Paramjothy Chelliah of then a doyen in the legal profession.

Balarajah was admitted as an advocate and solicitor of the High Court in Malaya on 17th March 1971. He started his legal practice with M/s. Allen & Gledhill, and later joined Arthur Lee & Co. Subsequently he started his own legal practice of Balarajah & Co. From the time he was called to the Bar, Balarajah seemed to possess insatiable interest in the affairs of the Johore State Bar Committee.

He served as its Secretary, and from 1990 to 1993 he served as its Chairman, and served as Acting Chairman from 2004 to 2005 and 2010 and 2011. He has also served as a member of the Bar Council from 1990 to 1993 and from 2010 to 2011.

It is during the time when he was serving as Hon. Secretary to the Johore Bar Committee I got to know him. In 1974 when my first book Quantum in Accident Claims was published Balarajah officiated the launching of it at the New Hong Kong Restaurant.

When the time arrived for his initiation into education his father moved to Kluang, the town with the famous railway station serving coffee

Apart from serving the Johore Bar in the administrative capacity he was also well versed with the legal literature. His articles, poems and humour have adorned the Johore Bar’s Official publication INFO since 1979.

His articulation of thoughts he had marshalled were superb, pleasant to read, and thought provoking.

and toast which continues even today.

Balarajah’s early education began in earnest at Government English School, Kluang. He then moved to Johore Bahru to continue his education at

Balarajah was a man of many talents and interests. Aside associating himself deeply in law, he also saw the necessity to serve the community. The life of a human being is incomplete if that life

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Balarajah has lived a life he wanted, he has served the legal profession well and was satisfied as a lawyer; he enjoyed friendship, and he also enjoyed sharing life’s experience. Nature has taken Balarajah into its bossom but it cannot erase the friendliness he has carved so deeply into the memory of each of us.

Balarajah and his spouse and companion Gan Ee Peng have two children, a daughter Vishalini Balarajah, married to Ron Chan, and a son Veejay Balarajah.

Balarajah passed away peacefully in his sleep at the age of seventyone, on 9th January 2019. He has left behind many friends aside his beloved ones to remember him. The Bar has indeed lost a colourful character, who has made its tradition glow.

tahun 1993, Allahyarhamah telah menjalani latihan dalam kamar di Selangor dan telah diterima masuk sebagai peguambela & peguamcara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya pada 06/05/1994 dan beramalan di Selangor dan telah Allahyarhamah Hajjah menubuhkan perkongsian di Norashirin Binti Sulaiman telah atas nama Ashirin, Kamariah dilahirkan pada 7hb November, & Nor di Klang Selangor.

1969 di Taiping Perak dan telah mendapat pendidikan sekolah telah menengah di Sekolah Menengah Allahyarhamah King George V Seremban, bertemu jodoh dengan Encik Negeri Sembilan sehingga Sharudin bin Mohd Saman, seorang pegawai Kastam tingkatan 6. berpangkat Penolong Kanan Pengarah Kastam dan telah Allahyarhamah telah diterima berumahtangga pada 28hb belajar di November, 1999. Pada tahun 2000, Allahyarhamah telah Universiti Malaya dalam berpindah ke Johor Bahru jurusan Undang-undang mengikuti suaminya yang pada tahun 1989 dan telah bertukar kerja ke Johor menamatkan pengajian Bahru. dengan jayanya pada tahun 1993.

Saya mengenali Allahyarhamah selanjutnya Allahyarhamah pada tahun telah pada tahun 2000 1989 dan beliau merupakan beramalan di bawah firma rakan sekuliah saya. yang dikenali sebagai Ashirin

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

fails to be of service to the human society; and I have a nice feeling Balarajah understood this. This led him to be a Rotarian. He was a chartered member of Rotary Club of Tanjung Putri in 1987 and served as its President in 1992, and was made Paul Harris Fellow in the same year. To fulfill his literary ambitions he found himself to be the editor of District Governor’s Newsletter (Rotary Club). He always believed in sharing his thoughts and experiences. His constant devotion to God was detectable from the various video clips he sent to me during the last couple of years.

& Manita.

Allahyarhamah merupakan seorang pelajar yang K Siladass pendiam tetapi pintar.

Member of the Johore Bar Beliau juga seorang rakan yang baik dan tidak lokek dalam berkongsi ilmu dan pengetahuan dalam bidang undang-undang.

Apabila kami tamat pengajian pada

Pada tahun 2004, saya telah menjadi rakan kongsi beliau dan menubuhkan firma guaman Ashirin, Manita & Ismail di Mutiara Rini.

Selanjutnya di atas faktor logistic Allahyarhamah telah berpindah dan menjadi rakan

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

53

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

kongsi kepada firma Kartini & Partners di Bandar Baru Uda dan akhirnya firma guaman Ezzah Elia & Associates sehingga akhir hayat beliau.

Pemergian beliau ke Rahmatullah akibat kanser payu dara amatlah menyedihkan dan meninggalkan kesan mendalam kepada keluarga beliau terutamanya anak-anak Allahyarhamah yang masih remaja dan bersekolah di A level Seremban, Sekolah Sains, MRSM dan bersekolah menengah di Johor Bahru masing-masingnya iaitu Muhamad Azim, Ahmad Fikri, Nur Fatin dan Ahmad Fuad.

Di kalangan rakan-rakan peguam, beliau terkenal sebagai seorang rakan peguam yang lemah lembut, berhati mulia dan bersedia berkongsi pendapat, memberi tunjuk ajar kepada rakan peguam yang muda terutama dalam urusan conveyancing di mana beliau mempunyai pengalaman yang luas termasuk juga prosiding mahkamah terutamanya bidang undang-undang Tanah, banking dan harta pesaka.

Hubungan keluarga Allahyarhamah dan keluarga saya juga rapat termasuk juga beberapa orang peguam-peguam lain menjadikan kehilangan beliau yang baik budi pekertinya amatlah menyedihkan kami rakan-rakan peguam beliau. Semoga rohnya dicucuri rahmat dan ditempatkan di kalangan orang-orang yang beriman. Al-Fatihah.

Mr Roy Rajasingham Vallipuram was born to Mr and Mrs Chelliah Vallipuram on 11th August 1951 in Klang, Selangor.

He had his early education in ACS Klang, and continued his studies in Johor Bahru, when the family moved south. After his Form Five education, he started work as a clerk in General Motors, in Tampoi, Johor Bahru.

Observing the successful career of his elder brother, Mr Reginald Vallipuram, Roy was motivated to pursue law. He then commenced his “A Levels� and took up law in the University of London in 1988. He obtained his LLB degree in 1991.

He chambered with his brother, Mr Reginald from January 1993 to September 1993, and was called to the Malaysian Bar on 15th October 1993.

Akhir sekali, saya memohon supaya nota prosiding ini disimpan di dalam Arkib a Legal Assistant in his brother’s Mahkamah Tinggi dan satu Salinan diserahkan He worked as st firm until 31 December 2006. Thereafter he set kepada waris Allahyarhamah. up his own practice in the name and style of Roy & Associates.

Ismail bin Mohd Tahir Member of Johore Bar Even though Roy had an active practice and was doing well as a litigator, his real passion was singing.

He loved singing Tamil songs, and whenever he had some spare time, or an opportunity presented itself, he would pursue his singing.

In fact, Mr Reginald states that Roy started singing in concerts in Johor Bahru from the age of 20.

54

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

During his student days in London, he took part in concerts there. He took part in many concerts in various places locally and was well known as a proliferate singer of old Tamil songs amongst the Indian community here.

He had his own band, named Katharavan and even played the saxophone for Singapore Broadcasting Corporation and did many programs for them.

He then received invitations to perform in India, and to improve his diction, he even started taking Tamil classes, none other than from my mother, to obtain a sufficient command of the language.

He has performed in at least 2 major concerts in South India.

The highlights of his singing career was performing in Jotic auditorium a few years back with an entire band from India and singing duets with a very famous play back singer, P. Susheela.

Unfortunately, his legal and singing career suffered a serious set-back, when he fell and fractured his hip bone on 31st July 2018. Although the fracture healed, he suffered from a peripheral neuropathy which affected his sleep pattern and general health seriously.

Around the end of April 2019, he fell ill due to an infection and had to be warded at the Sultanah Aminah Hospital, Johor Bahru. On 9th May 2019 he passed away due to a sudden cardiac arrest.

Roy remained an eligible but not an available bachelor till the end. He leaves behind his elder brothers, Mr Reginald and Richard and an elder sister, Margaret to mourn his loss.

He was a gentle and soft-spoken man.

He always had a smile and a greeting for everyone. His passing is a real loss to the legal fraternity and an even greater loss to the music community.

May his soul rest in peace and the angels be serenaded by his melodious voice.

Good-bye Roy. J. Chandrika Member of Johore Bar Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Yang Dihormati Mr. Roger Lo Ming, Pengerusi Johore Bar Dato’ Abdul Fareed Bin Abdul Gafoor, Presiden Bar Council Rakan-rakan Peguam Yang Bijaksana Para Hadirin Yang Dihormati Pada hari ini, kita sama-sama berkumpul untuk menghormati dan memperingati rakan-rakan ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia yang telah meninggalkan kita buat selama-lamanya.

Sehubungan itu, saya hadir prosiding pagi ini bagi pihak YBhg. Tuan Peguam Negara Malaysia. Saya telah diwakilkan untuk menyampaikan rasa dukacita beliau atas ketidakhadiran beliau pada Istiadat hari ini atas desakan tugas-tugas rasmi.

Saya juga hadir bagi pihak semua Pegawai Perkhidmatan Kehakiman dan Perundangan bagi bersama-sama melahirkan perasaan sedih kami di atas pemergian Allahyarham-Allahyarham dan mendiang-mendiang ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia ini serta menyampaikan ucapan salam takziah kami kepada keluarga mereka.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

Yang Arif, dengan rendah diri saya memohon izin Yang Arif untuk meneruskan ucapan saya dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

Yang Arif, Today’s proceedings should not be treated as a solemn and melancholic occasion. Instead it should be an opportunity for us to commemorate and honour the lives and memories of these 5 members.

We thank God for their presence in our lives and we ask for God’s blessing for their departed souls and the families they left behind.

Yang Arif, On behalf of the Honourable Attorney General and the officers of the Judicial and Legal Service, I extend our heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the members we honour today. I would also like to associate myself wholeheartedly with the sentiments and tributes expressed by my learned friends throughout today’s proceedings.

Yang Arif, Akhir kata, saya dengan rendah diri mengusulkan supaya Rekod Prosiding hari ini disimpan di Arkib Mahkamah yang Mulia ini dan sesalinan diserahkan kepada setiap keluarga Allahyarham dan mendiang ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia yang kita kenang dan ingati hari ini.

Sekian, terima kasih.

JAILANI BIN RAHMAN Pengarah Guaman Negeri Johor

55

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

SPEECH BY MR ROGER LO MING, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR My Lady,

Tn. Hj. Jailani bin Rahman, Senior Federal Counsel,

We have heard how our 5 departed members have lived their lives to the fullest and how they could have still contributed much more but for their early demise.

Representing the Honourable Attorney General

I did not have the privilege of knowing Mr. Ravichandran, Pn. Norashirin and Mr. Roy Rajasingam at close quarters, but I take note of each of their respective background so lucidly presented by my learned friends.

The late Balarajah was a former Chairman of the Johore Bar. I was told that he was an avid, passionate and competent writer. He had contributed numerous articles to INFO, the Johor Bar’s magazine.

I did have the honour of knowing the late En. Daud personally. He used to attend Muar High Court very often in the early 2000s when I was a junior then.

I remembered him as a tall and handsome man.

The junior lawyers would always enjoy a cup of tea with him at the warm canteen after the court proceedings and he as the most senior lawyer at the table, En. Daud will make sure that he settled the bill for everyone, another good tradition of the Bar that needs to be maintained and practiced.

The Johore Bar fully associates with the sentiments expressed by my learned friends. These 5 members will live long in our memory. Their comradeship and contribution to the Bar will be cherished.

In closing My Lady, I humbly and respectfully move that the record of these proceedings be kept in the archives of this Honorable Court with a copy thereof be extended to the respective bereaved families.

Much obliged, My Lady.

Roger Lo Ming Chairman, Johore Bar

56

SPEECH BY T DATUK SEE M HIGH COURT Dato Abdul Fareed bin Abdul Gafoor, President of the Malaysian Bar Mr Roger Lo Ming Chairman of the Johor Bar Mr Mohd Rasheed bin Hassan, Mr Badrol Hisham bin Mohd Sani, Mr Sila Dass, Mr Ismail bin Mohd Tahir and Ms Chandrika Jaganathan, who moved the tributes to the departed members of the Bar in whose memory the reference proceedings are held Family members of the late Mr Ravichandran a/l Sinnappah, the late Mr Daud bin Asmoni, the late Mr Balarajah s/o Subramaniam, the late Pn Norashirin binti Sulaiman and the late Mr Roy Rajasingam a/l Vallipuram Officers of the Judicial and Legal Service, Members of the Johor Bar, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Today we from the Bench, Bar and the Attorney General’s Chambers come together to pay tribute to and honour the lives of the late Mr Ravichandran a/l Sinnappah, the late Mr Daud bin Asmoni, the late Mr Balarajah s/o Subramaniam, the late Pn Norashirin binti Sulaiman and the late Mr Roy Rajasingam a/l Vallipuram.

I regret I do not know any of the deceased personally. However from the warm and glowing tributes paid to them earlier, I caught a glimpse of what they must have been like and the sense of loss felt by those who knew them. The huge turnout today bears testament to the deep love and affection their friends and colleagues had for them.

The late Mr Ravichandran came from a family of teachers but fortunately for the legal profession,

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MEE CHUN, JUDGE OF THE T OF MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU found his calling as lawyer. He made his mark as a litigator and yet had time to be of assistance to all fellow members of the Bar. He was always to be found with a smile on his face.

He was equally good in the kitchen, able to whip up dishes at a moment’s notice. They say the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach but I guess it was the other way round for his wife, Ms Sunita. With his Muhibbah friends and his love for teh tarik, he epitomised what it means to be a Malaysian with no regard to race or religion.

The late En Daud was a Police Inspector in Singapore before taking up law. He then lectured in Universiti Teknologi Mara before venturing into legal practice. His work in law enforcement and the academia stood him in good stead as a lawyer. He went through much adversity but emerged stronger from it. That speaks volumes of his character. It was interesting to hear his parents named him after a road; normally a road is named for you. In this instance, his parents did the reverse to save the authorities the trouble of searching for a road to name after him.

The late Mr Balarajah’s life was synonymous with his work in the Johor State Bar since the early 70’s. He served as the Secretary, Chairman and Acting Chairman and was also a member of the Bar Council. If that was not enough, he also found time to be a Rotarian, in order to give back to the community. He truly lived up to the Rotary Club’s motto of Service Above Self. Over and beyond this, he was a lawyer 1st and served the legal profession well. He was a man larger than life with a great sense of humour and the gift of pensmanship as shown in his regular contributions in the Johor Bar publication, Info.

The late Pn Norashirin did her law in University Malaya, my alma mater. From all accounts she was a gentle person of few words, but as the saying goes “still waters run deep”.

She was most generous in the sharing of her knowledge especially in conveyancing and had time for the younger members of the Johor Bar. She will be deeply missed.

The late Mr Roy was an extremely talented and gifted singer and musician, when not engaged in legal practice. He can be regarded as another Sudirman but of Tamil songs in the legal profession. 2 songs to describe his life spring to mind, both by Cliff Richard – The Young Ones and Bachelor Boy. He loved life and was as happy as a lark. Who wouldn’t be when you can pursue your passions which was music and the law at the same time. If he is anything like his brother,

Mr Reginald, then he would certainly be a gentleman in every sense of the word.

The passing of the above departed members have left a void in the hearts of their family members, friends and colleagues.

To the families, you have lost a beloved spouse or a parent or a sibling. No words can take away your pain and grief.

However do take comfort from the love and memories shared and the knowledge they led a full life of service to the legal profession and the community.

“Those we love don’t go away, They walk beside us everyday Unseen, unheard but always near still loved, Still missed and very dear”.

“When someone you love becomes a memory, the memory becomes a treasure”.

I know of no other profession other than the legal profession where the members come together to honour and remember the lives of their departed members. This tradition must continue. The Bench will continue to be a part of this tradition and support such reference proceedings as and when necessary.

In response to the remarks of the President of the Malaysian Bar, I would say the Bar is a reflection of its members and today all that is good of the Bar has come together. You have all come together united in your grief and yet united in the spirit of what the legal profession is truly capable of – fairness, justice and to uphold the rule of law.

I hereby order that a copy of today’s reference proceedings be kept in the Court archives and a copy be forwarded to the respective families.

My deepest condolences. May their souls rest in peace.

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

SEE MEE CHUN JUDGE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA JOHOR BAHRU

57

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE NEWLY ADMITTED MEMBERS OF THE BAR (JOHOR) (AS AT TIME OF PUBLICATION)

NO

NAME

FIRM

DATE OF ADMISSION

1

SARANIA A/P SINATAMBY

M S MIRANDA & CO

10/01/2019

2

ADELYN LOH BI LING

CHOO & K C KOK

27/01/2019

3

ANGIE TAN YI CHYUIN

DAVID GURUPATHAM & KOAY

27/01/2019

4

CHUA XIAN JIN

TIA & NOORDIN

27/01/2019

5

CRYSTAL MOK SAU YIN

ROGER TAN & PARTNERS

27/01/2019

6

KEK SHI YUA

K H KOH, AZHAR & KOH

27/01/2019

7

KHAIRIL AMIR BIN KAMAROLZAMAN

A RAHIM & CO

27/01/2019

8

LIM EE FANG

TIA & NOORDIN

27/01/2019

9

LOH CHAI NING

ARTHUR LEE & CO

27/01/2019

10

WANG JING HUEI

RODZIAH & CO

27/01/2019

11

CHEAH SEE YAN

NOR DING & CO

28/01/2019

12

LEE JIA YEONG

LOW & PARTNERS

28/01/2019

13

MUHAMMAD ZAHIER BIN ROSLI

ROSLI KAMARUDDIN & CO

28/01/2019

14

NOOR AZREEN BINTI ANA

WANG & SB WONG

28/01/2019

15

WONG WAN TING

GAN & LIM

28/01/2019

16

SYED AZHARUL ASIQ BIN SYED AZHAR

M N HALIM SYAFFIE & ASSOCIATES

21/02/2019

17

NUR SHAFIQAH BINTI MOHAMAD SHARIFUDIN

TEH POH TEIK & CO

24/02/2019

18

ROZANA BINTI ROSLAN

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

24/02/2019

19

TAM KWANG CHIEN AARON

C S TAM & CO

24/02/2019

58

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

20

TANG RUO QING

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

24/02/2019

21

AMER ASHRHAF BIN AZUDDIN

ABDUL RAMAN SAAD & ASSOCIATES

20/03/2019

22

AMIERA WAHYUNIE BINTI ZAINORDIN

REGINALD VALLIPURAM & CO

20/03/2019

23

CHAI CHEE PING

WANG & SB WONG

20/03/2019

24

EVON GOH YOKE HAYN

ANAD & NORAINI

20/03/2019

25

LIM KOK KEE

LIM SOH & GOONTING

20/03/2019

26

NUR FARAHIN BINTI RAMLAN

IKBAL SALAM & ASSOCIATES

20/03/2019

27

POH ZEE YIE

CHIONG & PARTNERS

20/03/2019

28

MANDY NG

TAY PUAY CHUAN & CO

21/03/2019

29

AMIRUL AIZAD BIN MOHD NOOR

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

14/04/2019

30

LOGESWARY A/P RAMACHANDRAM

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

14/04/2019

31

NURUL'AIN BINTI MOHD ALI HUZAIRY

RODZIAH & CO

14/04/2019

32

UMARUL MUDZAMIR BIN MOHD NIZAM

ZAINUL RIJAL TALHA & AMIR

14/04/2019

33

ADRIAN TAN YEN SERN

K H TAN & CO

02/05/2019

34

HUMAH DEVI A/P SIVARAJAN

CLARENCE EDWIN LAW OFFICES

15/05/2019

35

NARISHMA TIWARI A/P KARAM SHANKAR

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

15/05/2019

36

AMIRA AISYA BINTI ABD AZIZ

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

26/06/2019

37

FATIN HANANI BINTI HAHZAMAN

THE LAW CHAMBERS OF FAZALY ALI

26/06/2019

38

KRISHNAAVENI A/P MUNIANDY

ZAID IBRAHIM & CO

26/06/2019

39

PAN NOYK JUN

LIM SOH & GOONTING

26/06/2019

40

PHEE SHYE CHIA

LENG & CO

26/06/2019

41

SITI ATIKAH BINTI JAMALUDIN

HAFEZ & PARTNERS

26/06/2019

42

WAN NURFARAHIN BINTI WAN MANSOR

HAZZA KHALID SURAYA & PARTNERS

26/06/2019

43

DHILIP NAIR A/L R.N. ATCHUTHAN

MANIAM NAIR & CO

27/06/2019

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

59

44

NUR SYAFIQAH BINTI PARDEE

ZUFAIDI & ASSOCIATES

27/06/2019

45

NURAFIQAH BINTI MD YUSOF

LEE & FONG

27/06/2019

46

SOFIA BINTI AYUB

J A NATHAN & CO

27/06/2019

47

SYAZWANI BINTI MD LATIF

CHRIS LEE & PARTNERS

27/06/2019

48

CHIN XIN YI

LOW & PARTNERS

21/07/2019

49

FATIN FARHANA BINTI RAHMAN

NAJIB OMAR & CO

21/07/2019

50

HOW CHEN HONG

GAN & ZUL

21/07/2019

51

MAVIN RAJAH A/L VIKNESWARAN

BALARAJAH & CO

21/07/2019

52

NUR IYLIA BALQIS ZUHANI BINTI NUR MOHAMMAD BAKHTIR

FAIZAH AISHAH RAHMAN & ASSOCIATES

21/07/2019

53

NUR IZZATI BINTI YAACOP

SHAHINUDDIN & RANJIT

21/07/2019

54

NURAFIQAH BINTI MOHD KHALIL

TEH POH TEIK & CO

21/07/2019

55

ROWENA EVANGELINE

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

21/07/2019

56

FATHEIN NABILA AISYAH BINTI MOHAMED YUSOPE

SHOBANA, LINDA & PARTNERS

25/07/2019

57

FATIMAH BINTI ROSLAN

ANA SHAHRANA ANNUAR & CO

25/07/2019

58

IMAN BINTI SORKAPLI

ADILLAH A. NORDIN (MELAKA)

25/07/2019

59

NUR FATEHA BINTI MOHD SAHRI

LILY & CO

25/07/2019

60

NURULAIN BINTI ABD RAZAK

SUKHDEV & ASSOCIATES

25/07/2019

61

TAN MUI HOON

DESMOND HO & ASSOCIATES

25/07/2019

62

FATIN NUR ARINA BINTI ZULKIFLI

ZAINUL RIJAL TALHA & AMIR

08/08/2019

63

KANAGESHWARI A/P MUTHU

FREDA SABAPATHY & CO

08/08/2019

64

LOK CHA JUNG

CHIONG & PARTNERS

08/08/2019

65

NABILA BINTI SAHAR

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

08/08/2019

66

NOOR ASZREEN BINTI MOHD ISHAK

OMAR ISMAIL HAZMAN & CO

08/08/2019

67

NUR HAZIRA BINTI JAMAL

ZAID IBRAHIM & CO

08/08/2019

60

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

68

SITI KHADIJAH BINTI MD LAZIM

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

08/08/2019

69

GAN YI HONG

YEO CHAMBERS

22/08/2019

70

LEE YI MIN

WOON WEE YUEN & PARTNERS

22/08/2019

71

LING JIA WEN

YEO CHAMBERS

22/08/2019

72

MOHAMAD NAJIB BIN NORDIN

HAZELIN & ASSOCIATES

22/08/2019

73

NADHIRA BINTI RAZAK

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

22/08/2019

74

NURUL AMIRAH BINTI ABDUL RAHIM

YEO CHAMBERS

22/08/2019

75

NURUL SYADATUL NADIAH BINTI TOKIRAN

TJ GOH & CO

22/08/2019

76

OOI HUIE THENG

YEO CHAMBERS

22/08/2019

77

TAN HAN CHI

WONG LAW CHAMBERS

22/08/2019

78

AZLIANA BINTI MD TUMIN

ANUAR YUSOF & PARTNERS

11/09/2019

79

CHALINI A/P RAMU

A. RAHIM & CO

11/09/2019

80

KARTIYANI A/P LETCHUMANAN

A. RAHIM & CO

11/09/2019

81

LINDA TAN LIN YING

ROGER TAN & PARTNERS

11/09/2019

82

NUR MAWADDAH BINTI RASHID

ZAID IBRAHIM & CO

11/09/2019

83

LOO SIAW YEN

WILLIAM CHUA KON & ASSOCIATES

12/09/2019

84

ROS YASMIN BINTI ZOLKAFALI

RAHIM & LAWRNEE

12/09/2019

85

ALISON TAN SIEW MIN

C H TAN & ASSOCIATES

10/10/2019

86

NORFATIN BINTI ZALIZAN

ZUFAIDI & ASSOCIATES

10/10/2019

87

SOH HUI YENN

SOH YOK LAM & CO

10/10/2019

88

ANNABELLE TOK JIA XIN

TIA & NOORDIN

20/10/2019

89

AU CHING YI

ZAID IBRAHIM & CO

20/10/2019

90

BEATRICE YAP CHEN PHEY

ARTHUR LEE & CO

20/10/2019

91

CHAN HAU SEN

ROGER TAN & PARTNERS

20/10/2019

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

61

92

GOH YEN TING

LEE & TENGKU AZRINA

20/10/2019

93

MAISARAH BINTI ABD RAZAK

NAJIB OMAR & CO

20/10/2019

94

NUR AMIRA SYAHIRA BINTI MOHAMAD RODZI

ABDUL RAHMAN & PARTNERS

20/10/2019

95

THO XUE NEE

H H LONG & CO

20/10/2019

96

LIM PANG KIAT

K SILA DASS & PARTNERS

07/11/2019

97

LUSINTHRA PILLAI A/P UMADAS

CHRIS LEE & PARTNERS

07/11/2019

98

SHAHIRAH BTE SHAMSUDIN

EEU & MAZLIDA

07/11/2019

99

NOR DEANA AQILAH BINTI ALIMAN

MIMIRAHAYU HANIFF HENG & PARTNERS

21/11/2019

100

CHEAH PEAK HWA

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

24/11/2019

101

CHOR XING XUAN

SHIM & CO

24/11/2019

102

LIM KAI HANG

CHEW PONG HIM & PARTNERS

24/11/2019

103

PHUA YAN TING

SHAHRIZAT RASHID & LEE

24/11/2019

104

TAN JING TING

TAN & LEE

24/11/2019

105

AKMAL SYAHMI BIN SAHREN

TEH KIM TEH, SALINA & CO

15/12/2019

106

NOR FADILAH BINTI JOHANUDDIN

ANUAR YUSOF & PARTNERS

15/12/2019

107

NUR NAJIHAH BINTI HAMIDI

APANDI ALI & CO

15/12/2019

108

TAN WAN KIE

WANG & SB WONG

15/12/2019

109

CHUA YAN LIN

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

16/01/2020

110

FAN MEI QI

KINGTON TAN DZUL

16/01/2020

111

MOHD SALEHIN BIN SAMSUDIN

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

16/01/2020

112

NG WEI SHENG

WILLIAM, FLORENCE & PARTNERS

16/01/2020

113

NUR AZIZAH BINTI ISSAM

AZIE & PARTNERS

16/01/2020

114

RAJITA BOSE A/P RAJABOSE

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

16/01/2020

115

YEO JIAN HUI

CHIONG & PARTNERS

16/01/2020

62

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

116

ZAINURSYAZWANI BINTI ZAKARIA

ABDUL RAMAN SAAD & ASSOCIATES

16/01/2020

117

CHEE ZHEN YUE

K P LOW & CO

23/01/2020

118

KENNY LO JIA YI

GAN & ZUL

23/01/2020

119

MOHAMMAD BADRULAMEEN BIN SARUAN

SAHRIL, NIZA & CO

02/02/2020

120

NG YIE KAI

S K SONG

02/02/2020

121

PAN LEE MEI

KEE NORAINN & PARTNERS

02/02/2020

122

TANUSHA A/P MANIKAM

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

02/02/2020

123

WONG JIA NENG

GAN & ZUL

02/02/2020

124

DERRICK LEONG LI KEAT

HAZELIN & ASSOCIATES

23/02/2020

125

MOHAMAD AMIRUL AYSRAF BIN MAZURI

SYED FAISAL & CO

23/02/2020

126

NADZIRAH BINTI ABDUL RAZAK @ LAPOCHIK

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

23/02/2020

127

NUR ILYANA SYAFIRA BINTI ABD MALEK

AZMI & ASSOCIATES

23/02/2020

128

SITI HAJAR BINTI ANUAR

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

23/02/2020

129

CHEAH CHIA HSING

G RAVI

04/06/2020

130

CHONG KAI CONG

S K SONG

04/06/2020

131

CHUA EN DIAN

G RAVI

04/06/2020

132

MUNA FARHANA BINTI ZAINUDDIN

AZWAD IHSAN & CO

04/06/2020

133

TE LEE YIN

LIM & HOOI

04/06/2020

134

KELLY CHYE PEI YEE

CHYE KWEE YEOW & CO

15/06/2020

135

BUVANA DARSHINI A/P ANANDA KUMAR

A. RAHIM & CO

20/07/2020

136

FOO FANG LEONG

FREDA SABAPAHTY & CO

20/07/2020

137

JESSICA CHRISTOPHEL A/P GEORGE

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

20/07/2020

138

KIEW JIA HONG

GAN & ZUL

20/07/2020

139

KONG SIN HUI

WOON WEE YUEN & PARTNERS

20/07/2020

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

63

140

LIM SUAT WEI

WOON WEE YUEN & PARTNERS

20/07/2020

141

MOHD IVAN BIN HUSSEIN

T J GOH & CO

20/07/2020

142

VEERANASH BABU A/L KUMARESAN

FREDA SABAPAHTY & CO

20/07/2020

143

CHU SHU JUN

JAL & LIM

16/08/2020

144

FARAH AMELINA BINTI FARID

AIZALIAN ASMADI & CO

16/08/2020

145

HUA CHAI WEE

K F HUA & PARTNERS

16/08/2020

146

LEE BAO SHAN

LY OOI & CHAI

16/08/2020

147

OH CHUY HUI

LAU KOK GUAN LIANA & KUAN

16/08/2020

148

YAP XIN WEI

CHYE KWEE YEOW & CO

16/08/2020

149

YAP ZHI QING

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

16/08/2020

150

CHUA YONG YI

LEE & FONG

16/08/2020

151

DIYANA NAJIHAH BINTI MUHAMED FAUZI

SAHRIHAN & HAMDAN

16/08/2020

152

NUR'AIN BINTI MOHD NAJIB

SAHRIHAN & HAMDAN

16/08/2020

153

SHERIL ASHRINA BINTI MOHD AZHAR

TI-HAZALAN & CO

16/08/2020

154

TAN WAN CHIN

W L ONG & ASSOCIATES

16/08/2020

155

ANIS NUR ATIQAH BINTI ABD RAHMAN

AMIR ANUAR & CO

23/08/2020

156

MURSYIDAH BINTI MUSLIM

MANIAN K MARAPPAN & CO

23/08/2020

157

NABILAH RAHAH BINTI ZULKIFLI

WILLIAM CHUA KON & ASSOCIATES

23/08/2020

158

NAQIA ATHIRA BINTI ZULKANAIN

S E WONG & CO

23/08/2020

159

TAN PEI YING

ALAN TAN & ASSOCIATES

23/08/2020

160

ANGELA AN A/P PARAMES

A RAHIM & CO

26/08/2020

161

CHEW KOK WEE

LOW & PARTNERS

26/08/2020

162

DANIA DZUMIRA BINTI ZULKURNAIN

SHAHRIZAT RASHID & LEE

26/08/2020

163

GOH POH GEK

S K SONG

26/08/2020

164

HARITH HAZIM BIN ZULKIFLI

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

26/08/2020

64

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

165

KOO SHI XUN

CHOO & K C KOK

26/08/2020

166

LIM MIN MIN

WANG & SB WONG

26/08/2020

167

LOOI JING YI

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

26/08/2020

168

NOOR ANISHAH BINTI MOHD MUSAFRI

TAWFEEK BADJENID & PARTNERS

26/08/2020

169

TAN CANNY

WOON WEE YUEN & PARTNERS

26/08/2020

170

GUNASUNDARY A/P CHANDRAMOHAN

KALPANA & PARTNERS

09/09/2020

171

HENG WANG QIANWEI

ALLEN LOH & CO

09/09/2020

172

NUR HIDAYAH BINTI JASRI

LEE HISHAMMUDDIN ALLEN & GLEDHILL

09/09/2020

173

NURUL NADIRAH BINTI MOHD DRUS

RAHIM, AIDIL & PARTNERS

09/09/2020

174

TSANG CHING JING

ALLEN LOH & CO

09/09/2020

175

ENG YI WANG

SIMON TONG & PARTNERS

13/09/2020

176

GAJELAN A/L RAJAKUMAR

MANIAN K MARAPPAN & CO

13/09/2020

177

ALISON LOH CHIA LING

HALIM HONG & QUEK

27/09/2020

178

KANAGAAMBIGY A/P ELAMPARITHI

HALIM HONG & QUEK

27/09/2020

179

NUR ALIYA BINTI AMRAN

SHARIFUDDIN & CO

27/09/2020

180

NUR FARAHIN BINTI SUMARDI

ZAINUL RIJAL TALHA & AMIR

27/09/2020

181

NUR NADHILAH BINTI ABDUL KADIR JAILANI

ABDUL HARIS, NORHAYATI & CO

27/09/2020

182

YAP XIN MIN

S K SONG

27/09/2020

183

AHMAD NAFIS BIN M TAHRIR

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

07/10/2020

184

FARAH WAHIDAH BINTI MOHD SHARIP

RAZIYAN RAHIM & ASSOCIATES

07/10/2020

185

FELICIA GAW MEI XIAN

ROGER TAN & PARTNERS

07/10/2020

186

GAN WEI CHANG

WOON WEE YUEN & PARTNERS

07/10/2020

187

JEROME JOHN LUKE

REGINALD VALLIPURAM & CO

07/10/2020

188

KELLY LIM CHIA LI

SIEW LEE & CO

07/10/2020

189

LEE BAO TING

ALBERT DING, LEE & PARTNERS

07/10/2020

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

65

190

MUHAMMAD BIN MOHD NASIR

DPP

07/10/2020

191

NA YI LUN

WILLIAM, FLORENCE & PARTNERS

07/10/2020

192

NURLIANY NAJMA BINTI MOHD ROSLY

AKMAL SAUFI & CO

07/10/2020

193

PANG WEN LEI

TIA & NOORDIN

07/10/2020

194

TAN PUI SAN

ZAHAR & PARTNERS

07/10/2020

195

LEE QI YONG

L Y OOI & CHAI

20/10/2020

196

LIM TYNG CHIEH

TEH POH TEIK & CO

20/10/2020

197

LYDIA NADEERA BINTI AZHARUDDIN

OTHMAN HASHIM & CO

20/10/2020

198

SITI NURFARA FAZILUN IZYLIN BINTI AHMAD

ZAINUL RIJAL TALHA & AMIR

20/10/2020

199

TONG CHOON GUAN

HAMZAH SULAIMAN & PARTNERS

20/10/2020

200

CHRISTIE LIAU HUI MIN

YEO CHAMBERS

25/10/2020

201

CHU CIA MIN

YEO CHAMBERS

25/10/2020

202

KUAN POH YI

YEO CHAMBERS

25/10/2020

203

LEOW MENG CHOO

S K SONG

25/10/2020

204

MOHD FADZLE BIN AYUB

SYED ALWI, NG & CO

25/10/2020

66

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

JOHORE BAR STATISTICS AS AT 31ST OCTOBER 2020 Towns 31.10.2020 (1) Johor Bahru (2) Batu Pahat (3) Muar (4) Kluang (5) Kulai (6) Masai (7) Segamat (8) Kota Tinggi (9) Pontian (10) Tangkak (11) Yong Peng (12) Pasir Gudang (13) Ulu Tiram (14) Gelang Patah (15) Mersing (16) Simpang Renggam (17) Pekan Nanas (18) Labis In the State of Johor

LAW FIRMS Increase/Decrease 505 77 73 55 30 24 18 14 14 8 7 6 5 3 3 3 1 1 847

LAWYERS 31.10.2020 54 5 5 4 7 4 -1 -5 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 79

Increase/Decrease 1639 152 149 110 58 60 37 22 22 13 6 12 7 5 5 4 1 1 2303

70 5 10 9 15 26 -2 -6 2 3 0 2 4 -3 0 1 0 0 136

Total Membership

As at 31st October 2020, the total membership of the Johore Bar is 2303. There has been an increase of 136 members since the last statistics (on 31st December 2018). The total membership of the Johore Bar constitutes 11% approx. of that of the Malaysian Bar.

Lawyers in Johor Bahru

There are 1639 members practising in the city of Johor Bahru. They account for 71% of the total membership in the State of Johor (i.e. 1639/2303 members).

Law Firms in Johor Bahru

The total number of law firms in the State of Johor is 847. There has been an increase of 79 law firms since December 2018.

The number of law firms in Johor Bahru has increased (from 451 to 505). They constitute 59% approx. (i.e. 505/847) of the law firms in the State of Johor.

Number of law firms in the State of Johor

Number of lawyers in the State of Johor

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

67

68

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

INFO JOHORE BAR | info.johorebar.org.my

69