INFO Johore Bar - November 2022

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK

R. Anusha a/p Ragvan Editor

Dear Members of the Johore Bar,

We are happy to welcome you to INFO Johore Bar 2022! I am thankful for the opportunity given to present this term’s INFO Johore Bar for 2022/2023 as the Chairperson of the Publication & IT SubCommittee.

Here are the highlights from this edition of INFO : An interview session with our member, Datuk Dr Wong Kim Fatt, collection of articles from our members, photographs and write-ups from postpandemic events such as our reference proceedings, Welcoming High Tea for the

Judges & Judicial Commissioners’ and our usual festive “makan-makan” - and many more!

My sincere gratitude to members of the Johore Bar who have contributed articles and I humbly invite all to share your views/ case studies/articles to be published in the upcoming editions. Feedback and input are welcome for us to stay abreast and ensure quality publications in the future.

In the same spirit, my appreciation goes to the Publication & IT committee members and our secretariat staff for the assistance provided in producing this issue of INFO!

CHAIR’S FOREWORD

R. JAYABALAN

Dear members, I congratulate the editorial committee for coming up with this edition of INFO. The INFO is an iconic publication of the Johore Bar that has stood the test of time. It has served as a useful medium to record and update members on the programs undertaken by the Committee and also to give opportunity for our members to pen

their thoughts and have their writings published for the benefit of all members.

With the easing of the post-pandemic rules in respect of social events, public activities and social distancing, the Committee has started organizing more physical events as opposed to online programs that has been the norm in the last two years. We hope to receive

INFO Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

CHAIR’S FOREWORD

members support for this physical events. At the same time, as we have also grown accustomed to online programs, and noting the clear advantages of online programs in saving members’ time to participate and in garnering wider participation, the Committee will continue to organize online events along with physical events. Members are encouraged to participate and also provide their feedback or suggestions to the Committee for improvement.

The last few months have been an eventful period in the administration of justice in the country and as far as the independence of the judiciary is concerned. The judiciary led by the Chief Justice have boldly asserted and displayed by its actions that the independence of the judiciary is not to be trifled with, that it is an integral component of the doctrine of separation of powers under the Federal Constitution and that there should be no attempts, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the judiciary. The Bar, as partner in the administration of justice has stood firm with the judiciary in this and has expressed in no uncertain terms through public statements that the Bar will stand in line with the judiciary in defending its independence and in protecting the doctrine of separation of powers under the Federal Constitution. The Walk for Judicial Independence held by the Bar on 17.6.2022 at Padang Merbok following the resolution of the Malaysian Bar EGM on 27.5.2022 was a step in that direction to defend judicial independence and I am happy to see that this event has been given importance in this edition of INFO as well.

Major developments are also coming in our way as far as legal practice is concerned. Notwithstanding the ‘end’ of the pandemic, it is quite clear by now that online proceedings

that was introduced by the judiciary as a measure to manage administration of justice during the pandemic is unlikely to go away and will in fact, stay. If any, the usage of online proceedings is likely to be entrenched further by way of more laws and regulations. This is to be welcomed as our experience in the last two years have shown that online proceedings have saved much time and costs for lawyers and parties alike. Whilst online proceedings may not be suitable for all types of contested proceedings, it has proven to be workable and effective in a substantial type of proceedings without prejudice to the interest of justice. The Courts of Judicature Act 1964 has also been amended to facilitate online proceedings. There are also the recent amendments to the Act that enabled service of cause papers by online means and removed the right of appeal for decisions in certain interlocutory applications such as applications to strike out, summary judgment and setting aside of default judgments. This will likely change our approach to litigation with the focus now being more on resolving disputes on its substantial merits by way of full trial. This will save time and costs for lawyers and litigants alike. The Employment Act 1955 has also been substantially amended to the effect that it is now applicable to almost all employees regardless of their wage limit save for limited exceptions. This amendment will affect all law firms and lawyers and as such members are advised to study the amendments and reconsider the employment contract of all staff and lawyers in the firm before the implementation in January 2023. With that I wish all members a successful practice and I look forward to meeting you at our events. Thank you.

R. JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN

INFO JOHORE BAR welcomes articles, views and news (including photographs) be they legal non legal or extra-legal. The views of the writers of articles etc are not reflective of the views of the Bar Committee neither does the Bar endorse or adopt their views. However, the Johore Bar Committee reserves the right not to publish or to edit those published for content, clarity, style and space considerations. Contributions and enquiries may be directed to secretariat@ johorebar.org.my

www.johorebar.org.my www.info.johorebar.org.my

Editorial Committee 2022/23 Info Johore Bar

Walk for Judicial Independence

By R. Jayabalan

The Malaysian Bar Walk for Judicial Independence took place on 17 June 2022. The Walk was a peaceful protest against interference with the independence of the Judiciary and breaches of the fundamental principle of separation of powers. The Walk was to begin with a gathering at the Padang Merbok car park followed by march by lawyers to the Parliament to hand over a memorandum to the Prime Minister.

The Walk was pursuant to the “Resolution on Upholding and Protecting the Independence of the Judiciary and the Preservation of Public Confidence in the Judiciary” that was approved at the Extraordinary General Meeting (“EGM”) on 27 May 2022. The resolution amongst others, condemned the unprecedented manner in which the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (“MACC”) had publicly announced the

commencement of criminal investigation of a Superior Court Judge and disclosed the name of the judge to the public and that the manner that the investigation went on for an indefinite period and without proper closure was tantamount to an act of intimidation against the Judiciary. The Malaysian Bar was of the view that any complaint against Superior Court Judges and investigation by law enforcement agencies, if given undue and unwarranted publicity, will have a farreaching impact on the independence of the Judiciary and public confidence in the Judiciary and because of this any such investigation must be done in a manner that does not erode judicial independence and public confidence in the Judiciary.

There was heavy police presence when lawyers started gathering at the car park of Padang Merbok. The Office Bearers of the

Bar Council started the protest by giving their respective speeches. Following that the President of the Malaysian Bar led the lawyers to march towards the Parliament. The police however did not allow the march to proceed towards the Parliament despite the repeated impromptu negotiations. The heavy police presence and blockade prevented lawyers from leaving the gathering point and in the end the protest was physically confined

to the car park of Padang Merbok. After a prolonged stand-off, YB Datuk Wira Mas Ermieyati binti Samsudin, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) made her way to the car park of Padang Merbok and accepted the memorandum on behalf of the Prime Minister from the President of the Malaysian Bar.

R. Jayabalan

AN INTERVIEW WITH SENIOR MEMBER OF JOHORE

AN INTERVIEW WITH SENIOR MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR –DATUK DR WONG KIM FATT

BAR –DATUK DR WONG KIM FATT

INFO Could you tell us briefly about your childhood and your family?

Datuk Wong I was born in Pontian in 1940. My father was a watch repairer and my mother was a housewife. I was the eldest son and I had two younger brothers and sisters. I studied at the Pontian Pei Chun

Primary School and passed the Standard 6 exam in 1952. After that I studied at the Pontian Government English School between 1953 and 1958. Then in 1958, I passed my school certificate exam and entered English College in Johor Bahru. I got into the Arts class in 1959 and I was the top student there. At this

INFO had recently interviewed the most senior member based in Johor, Datuk Dr Wong Kim Fatt, to share his experience at the Bar for more than 50 years for the benefit of members of the Bar especially the younger members.

juncture I am sad to note that most of my class mates from that time in English College have passed away.

INFO Tell us about your journey to become a lawyer.

Datuk Wong In 1961 I went to read law at the Singapore University (NUS) and graduated in 1965. I was in the fourth or fifth batch there. My seniors from NUS included Professor Tommy Koh, Professor Koh Kheng Lian and the late senior lawyer John Ang who passed away in 2020. The late Karpal Singh was my class mate. Our former Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz, Justice Mokhtar Sidin and Justice Ariffin Jaka were also my batch mates. Another senior lawyer now in Johor Bahru Ong Ban Chai was my junior.

INFO When were you called to the Bar?

Datuk Wong I was called to the Malaysian Bar on 1.2.1966 and to the Singapore Bar on 13.11.1968. Although I was called to the Singapore Bar I had my practice all along in Malaysia. I did my pupillage in Johor Bahru with a senior lawyer Mr Omar Salleh. At that time we were not paid for pupillage and we were considered lucky to even get a place for pupillage with a senior lawyer. I supported myself financially by doing research work for my

former university and I was paid for this. This helped me to get through my chambering period.

INFO Please tell us about the early years of your practice.

Datuk Wong After my call, I was offered a place in a law firm in Kota Bharu known as Wan Mustapha & Co. So I moved to Kota Bharu. My monthly salary then was around RM600. I was doing litigation in Kota Bharu and Kuala Terengganu courts between 1966 and 1968. I recall that my first case was reported in the law reports – Haji Abdul Rahman v Govt of Malaysia & Anor (1966) 2 MLJ 174. I was given this case shortly after joining the firm and was instructed to go to court. The Judge was Abdul Aziz J and my opponent was Azmi bin Dato’ Kamaruddin, who was the State Legal Advisor. There were not many lawyers then in Kota Bharu and we knew each other quite well unlike now where there are so many lawyers and we don’t really know each other. I was in Kota Bharu for about three years and after that I moved back to Johor Bahru and joined the firm L M Ong & Co as Legal Assistant. In 1970, I joined the firm Allen & Gledhill in Johor Bahru as commission partner. I was also doing some lecturing at the Pulada Army College in Kota Tinggi.

INFO Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

On 25.4.1980, the Attorney General appointed me as Notary Public. Between 1981 and 1982 I served as Judicial Commissioner at the Seremban High Court in February 1988, I set up my own firm under the name Gulam & Wong with Dato’ Gulamoydeen Mohd Haniffa. He was in charge of the Kuala Lumpur office whilst I took charge of our Johor Bahru office. I was primarily doing litigation mainly at the High Court. My two sons Wong Boon Lee and Wong Boon Chong joined the firm later.

INFO Were you active at the Bar then?

Datuk Wong We used to look forward to the annual dinner and sports activities. I regularly attended the Bar annual dinners. I also played hockey and table tennis for many years for the Johore Bar. I have served as committee member of the Johore Bar Committee and the East Coast Bar Committee that included lawyers from Kelantan, Terengganu and Pahang. The three states were considered as one Bar at that time. But later they separated and set up their own state Bars. The Johore Bar Chairman then was Abdullah A Rahman who later became President of the Malaysian Bar. He moved my call to the Bar in 1966.

INFO Please tell about some of the cases that you handled over the years.

Datuk Wong I was mainly handling land law cases and there are about 100 cases of mine reported in the law journals. One of the early cases that I remember quite well was the Temenggong Securities case on the issue of registrar’s caveat. This case was decided by the Federal Court ((1974) 2 MLJ 45) and later went up to the Privy Council (1977 AC 302). Another Privy Council case that I handled was the Perdana Properties case (1982) 1 All ER 193. I also appeared with Mr S. Gunasegaran in M&J Frozen Food Sdn Bhd & Anor v Siland Sdn Bhd & Anor [1994] 1 MLJ 294 before the Supreme Court that became an often cited authority on indefeasibility of title under the National Land Code.

I must share my Privy Council experience. This was something new to me then. I was not familiar with the Privy Council procedures in UK and on the appointment of solicitors and Queen’s Counsel (QC). We had to appoint the solicitors in London first and they will then suggest a QC to argue the case. The English solicitors will do all the filings and comply with the procedures. One of the practice that struck me at the Privy Council was

that we have to clear the court before the judges enter. When it was time for the judges to enter, the court clerk will ask the lawyers to leave the courtroom and return after the judges had taken their seat. Here, lawyers will be present and to rise when judges enter the courtroom.

Taking the matter to Privy Council was not cheap and not all litigants could afford this. It was expensive to appoint QC. I recall in some of my matters we paid the QC about GBP 5,000, in addition to the fees for the solicitors. Because of this many clients had to forgo the option of appealing to Privy Council after the Federal

INFO

Court decision even when they were not happy with the decision.

You have been in practice for more than 50 years. What are your views on the Bar then and now?

Datuk Wong Those days there were very few lawyers and we knew each other. The court proceedings were in English with more emphasis on oral advocacy. There used to be a lot of oral arguments although sometimes written submissions were required by the court if the matter was complicated. Nowadays, the courts require written submissions almost all the

time but cases are disposed of quite fast now compared to those days. I remember there was one case I handled that took about 12 years before it was finally resolved in my favour. There was no Key Performance Index (KPI) those days on case disposal.

INFO What about the judges that you may have appeared before?

Datuk Wong There were judges who were polite and courteous. It was a pleasure to appear before them. There were also some who were known to be fierce and gave a hard time to lawyers appearing before them.

INFO Due to the Covid19 pandemic, proceedings are now also conducted via online. How do you manage this?

Datuk Wong I attend online proceedings and this has been made necessary because of the Covid19 pandemic. Although I understand this need for online proceedings, personally I still prefer the old style of doing matters physically before the judge in open court. You can refer documents easily, give immediate response and the judge can also observe the demeanour quite easily. In my view, personal communication and experience in open court are important.

INFO One of the biggest change that you may have seen in the early 80’s was the shift to Bahasa Malaysia as the court language. How did you manage that change?

Datuk Wong I was quite lucky as I have passed Bahasa Melayu paper in Higher School Certificate examination and was able to handle the language shift. In fact, when I was a JC, I have also written judgments in the Malay language. One of the cases was Manoharan lwn Pendakwa Raya (1982) 2 MLJ (B) 3.

INFO What’s your advice to young lawyers in handling disappointments when the decision was not in their favour?

Datuk Wong Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. The important thing is that you must do your best for the client. You have no control over the outcome. If there is a chance to appeal and client can afford, then appeal. Otherwise, you just have to accept the outcome and move on.

INFO What’s your advice when dealing with clients?

Datuk Wong Lawyers must maintain a written retainer and instructions in order to avoid any disputes with clients. I always ask the clients to give

written instructions. Otherwise some clients will dispute what we do and will say “No, I never agreed to this.” The retainer must specify the instructions, and fees for the trial court. If there is appeal there should be a separate retainer. Lawyers must also be honest and straightforward with their client about the prospects of their case.

INFO You have written books and articles and also contributed to the recent edition of Malaysian Bullen & Leake Precedents of Pleadings on the chapter on Land Disputes. You are still actively in practice. How do you find time for all this?

Datuk Wong I find time to write in between work. I write because of my likings to the subject especially on land law matters. I have been writing from university days. So this continued even after I started practice. You must find the motivation to do it. But once the publication is done, it gives you the satisfaction and makes you happy. Writing also makes you more knowledgeable in that area of law.

The first book that I wrote was in 1980 : “Private Caveats : Entry, Extension, Removal and Appeals”. After that I edited the book “Enforcement of Charges Handbook” (1999) and wrote another book

“Company Resolutions” (2001). Amongst the articles that I have written were “Caveats, Prohibitory Orders and Injunctions under the National Land Code 1965” [2013] 1 CLJ 1 and “Stay of Execution Pending Appeal in Civil Litigation” [1999] 1 MLJ 1.

INFO Your advice to young lawyers?

Datuk Wong Many of the young lawyers are hardworking. They must keep themselves up to date on the law and must be able to assist the Court on the law. Master the language as well – Bahasa and also English. English is the language of the world and language of the law. Bahasa Melayu is now the language of the Courts in West Malaysia. You cannot expand your knowledge if you are not good in English. You must also observe and learn from the senior lawyers. If you are running your own practice, manage your finances well. Make sure you have enough financial resources in place to maintain the office and manage the monthly overheads carefully. As lawyers you must always be honest and observe your professional etiquette. In court, your first duty as counsel is to the court, while doing your best for the client.

INFO Thank you for your time

Datuk Wong.

INFO Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

PEMBUKTIAN DAN PEMBELAAN DALAM ISU PSIKIATRI

By Hj. Rosli Kamaruddin

PENDAHULUAN

“Secara global, seramai 450 juta individu di seluruh dunia mengalami gangguan mental, di mana gangguan mental, penyakit neurologi dan penyalahgunaan substans adalah menyumbang kepada 13% daripada beban penyakit global. Pertubuhan Kesihatan Sedunia atau WHO menganggarkan 1 dalam 4 individu mengalami gangguan mental pada satu-satu ketika dalam kehidupan mereka. Manakala, penyakit kemurungan (depression) menyumbang sebanyak 4.3% daripada beban penyakit global keseluruhan di mana ianya merupakan salah satu penyebab terbesar morbiditi.

Kajian Kesihatan dan Morbiditi Kebangsaan yang telah dilaksanakan pada tahun 2015 oleh Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia (KKM) mendapati prevalen masalah kesihatan mental dalam kalangan masyarakat Malaysia berumur 16 tahun dan ke atas adalah 29.2% (anggaran 4.2 juta). Ini bermaksud 1 dalam 3 masyarakat Malaysia mengalami isu yang berkait dengan masalah mental. Kajian itu turut menunjukkan bahawa prevalen masalah kesihatan mental juga adalah paling tinggi dalam kalangan mereka yang berumur 16-19 tahun dan dikalangan golongan yang berpendapatan rendah.”

(Sumber: Dipetik dari Kenyataan Akhbar Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia bertarikh 28 September 2016).

Mengikut statistik yang dikeluarkan pejabat Ketua Pendaftar Mahkamah Persekutuan pula, sejumlah 1,215,505 kes jenayah telah didaftarkan di Mahkamah Majistret pada tahun 2016. Manakala sejumlah 45,833 kes telah didaftarkan di Mahkamah Sesyen dan 4,674 lagi di Mahkamah Tinggi.

Berdasarkan angka-angka dan statistik yang dikemukakan di atas, undang-undang mestilah

bersedia untuk melindungi hak-hak orang yang dikatakan sebagai ‘tidak waras’ mengikut undang-undang (“legally insane”).

2. Beban Pembuktian Dalam Sesuatu Kes Jenayah

Adalah menjadi prinsip undang-undang mantap bahawa di akhir kes pendakwaan, Pendakwa harus membuktikan kes mereka pada tahap prima facie. Pada tahap ini juga haruslah dapat dibuktikan terdapat ‘bukti-bukti kredibel’ yang Tertuduh telah melakukan kesalahan seperti pertuduhan. YA Hakim Zainun Ali (pada ketika itu) dalam PP v Mok Kar Poh [2001] 5 CLJ 206 telah menyatakan bahawa prima facie bermaksud:

“As had been postulated in several authorities, a prima facie case though not conclusive is a case which is sufficient to call for an answer. It is also recurrent in all these authorities that although not conclusive, it is incumbent that there be credible evidence on each and every essential ingredient of the offence.”

“As had been futher emphasized in PP vs Ong Cheng Heong (1998) 4 CLJ 209 “credible

evidence is evidence which has been filtered and which has gone through the process of evaluation.”

Mahkamah Persekutuan dalam kes PP v Mohd Radzi Abu Bakar (2005) 6 MLJ 393 telah menggariskan secara ringkas langkah-langkah yang harus diambil oleh Mahkamah seperti berikut:

“(i) At the close of the prosecution’s case, subject the evidence led by the prosecution in its totality to a maximum evaluation. Carefully scrutinize the credibility of each of the prosecution’s witnesses. Take into account all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence. If the evidence admits of two or more inferences; then draw the inference that is most favorable to the accused;

(ii) Ask yourself the question: If I now call upon the accused to make his defence and elects to remain silent am I prepared to convict him on the evidence now before me? If the answer to that question is “Yes” then prima facie case has been made out and the defence should be called. If the answer is “No” then a prima facie case has not been made out and the accused should be acquitted;

(iii) After the defence is called, the accused elects to remain silent, then convict;

(iv) After defence is called, the accused elects to give evidence then go through the steps set out in Mat v PP [1963] MLJ 263.”

3.

Pembelaan ketidaksempurnaan akal diiktiraf dalam Kanun Keseksaan sebagai jawapan kepada mana-mana pertuduhan jenayah yang mana Seksyen 84 Kanun Keseksaan memperuntukkan seperti berikut:

Perbuatan seseorang yang tidak sempurna akal. Tidaklah menjadi kesalahan apa-apa jua yang dilakukan oleh seseorang yang, pada masa melakukannya, oleh sebab akalnya tidak sempurna, tidak berupaya mengetahui keadaan perbuatan itu atau bahawa apa yang dilakukannya itu adalah salah atau berlawanan dengan undang-undang.

Justeru, pembelaan yang berjaya adalah bila mana tertuduh bebas daripada pertuduhan atas alasan ketidaksempurnaan akal.

4. Anggapan Kewarasan

Undang-undang menganggap bahawa seseorang itu adalah waras melainkan jika dibuktikan sebaliknya. Mengikut Halsbury’s Laws of England, Edisi 3:

“Every man is presumed to be sane until the contrary is proved, and this presumption holds as well in civil as in criminal cases, though in the case of a will it is the duty of the executors or any other person setting up the will to show that it is the act of a competent testator.

Where a person has been proved or is admitted to have been mentally disordered as to be incapable for purposes of contract or disposition, the law presumes such a condition to continue until it is proved to have ceased.”

5. Beban Pembuktian Bagi Pembelaan Tidak Waras

Mana-mana Tertuduh yang berhasrat untuk menimbulkan pembelaan tidak waras di dalam sesuatu kes terhadapnya, mereka akan tertanggung beban untuk membuktikan ketidakwarasan mereka secara undang-undang (‘legally insane’) semasa kesalahan itu didakwa dilakukan.

Antara kes-kes yang boleh menjadi rujukan adalah seperti berikut:

INFO Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

Pembelaan Bagi Seseorang Yang Tidak Sempurna Akal

Juraimi Bin Hussein v PP [1998] CLJ 383

“It is also settled law that the burden of proof rests on the person who raises the defence of insanity”

John Nyumbei v PP [2007] 2 CLJ 509

“In law, once the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt, as was done in this case, there is a presumption that the accused person was sane at the time he committed the offence (see Bhikari AIR 1966 SC 1) This rebuttable presumption may be refuted either by leading evidence or relying on the prosecution own evidence.

the prosecution or from the defence witnesses. It is a lighter burden than that cast upon the prosecution who must prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.”

Public Prosecutor v Shalima Bi [2016] MLJU 04

“The law is trite that the Court is only concerned with legal insanity and not with medical insanity. Section 84 of the Code is concerned with legal insanity and not with medical insanity. The distinction between legal and medical insanity has been explained by the learned authors of Ratanlal and Dhirajlal’s Law of Crimes 26th Edition in the following terms at page 307:

Satu lagi aspek penting yang perlu difahami setiap pengamal undang-undang adalah perbezaan antara tidak waras dari sudut perubatan dan undang-undang. Pembuktian tidak waras secara medikal sahaja adalah tidak memadai seperti yang telah diputuskan dalam nas undang-undang seperti di bawah:

PP v Misbah Saat [1998] 1 CLJ 759

“It is an established principle of law that if an accused person can establish that he was of unsound mind/insane at the time of the commission of the act of wrongdoing, he is entitled to raise the defence of insanity under s. 84 of the Penal Code…It must be stressed that the test for insanity under s.84 is not the medical test of insanity but the legal test, that is, the insanity must be such as to fall within the ambit of s.84. As Shankar J said in Pendakwa Raya v Zainal Abidin Bin Mohd Zaid [1993] 1 CLJ 147 at p.149;

The issue as to whether an accused person was insane in the sense required by s.84 of the Penal Code is a matter for the court. Legal insanity is not for the medical witnesses to decide however eminent they may be.

That onus is upon the defence and it is to satisfy the court on the balance of probabilities only. It can be discharged from evidence adduced from

7. ‘Medical insanity’ and ‘legal insanity’. –There is a good deal of difference between ‘medical insanity’ and ‘legal insanity’ and courts are concerned only with the legal and not the medical aspect of the matter. It is not every kind of frantic humour or something unaccountable in a men’s action, that points him out to be a mad man, to be excepted from punishment. It is not mere eccentricity or singularity of manner that would suffice the plea of insanity. Abnormality of mind is not by itself sufficient to show that the accused must have acted while of unsound mind. Such exemption can be claimed only when the insane person is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or he is doing either wrong or contrary to law.

Thus, where medical insanity has been established, the defence of insanity under section 84 of the Code is only available where, at the time the accused committed the act, he: (a) did not know the nature of his act; or (b) did not know that what he was doing was wrong; or (c) did not know that what he was doing was contrary to law.”

Ringkasnya, pembuktian secara undang-undang perlu melalui proses-proses berikut:

i. Pengemukaan Laporan Psikiatri;

6. Tidak Waras Medikal lawan Tidak Waras Undang-undang (Medical Insanity V Legal Insanity)

ii. Keterangan doctor - berkaitan pemerhatian, rawatan dan siasatan;

iii. Keterangan saksi-saksi lain yang mengetahui dan melihat perlakuan tertuduh psikiatri tersebut;

iv. Melepasi ujian undang-undang iaitu “the wrong doer was incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law at the time the offence was committed’.

8. Penutup

Mana-mana Tertuduh yang telah dibuktikan secara undang-undang sebagai mengalami ketidaksempurnaan akal masih boleh menikmati perlindungan di bawah Perlembagaan untuk mendapat hak perbicaraan secara adil. Dalam membuat pertimbangan ke arah itu, Mahkamah telah diberi panduan undang-undang sebelum memutuskan sama ada seseorang Tertuduh itu adalah waras atau sebaliknya dan bukan sekadar menerima keterangan pakar secara in toto atau konklusif.

Yang Arif Dato Prof Visu Sinnadurai, Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Muar (pada ketika itu) telah mengkaji dan mengemukakan dapatan undangundang mengenai hak-hak tertuduh psikiatri untuk mengaku bersalah ataupun untuk bergantung kepada pembelaan tidak waras. Keputusan kes ini telah mengubah kedudukan tradisional hak tertuduh psikiatri yang mana sebelumnya Mahkamah telah disarankan agar tidak menerima pengakuan bersalah bagi tertuduh-tertuduh yang didapati mengalami masalah kesihatan mental. Hakim Dato Visu (pada ketika itu) telah memutuskan bahawa jika tertuduh psikiatri tersebut telah kembali sihat semasa dibicarakan (fit to plead in trial) maka dia juga berhak memilih untuk mengaku bagi kesalahan semasa beliau tidak waras ataupun mahu bergantung kepada pembelaan tidak waras.

“An accused person who has recovered from his unsoundness of mind, and who is fit to stand trial, may choose not to raise the defence of insanity. Where the accused is no longer suffering from any mental impediments, he may choose to accept responsibility for his act. Whatever the reason, so long as he is fit to stand trial, his right to take whatever course of action prescribed by the law, remains intact.”

7. Hak Tertuduh Untuk Mengaku SalahPrinsip Bagi Kes-Kes Psikiatri Dalam Kes Misbah Saat [1998] 1 CLJ 759

Plain English in Legal Writing

By Yang Pei Keng 2.5.2022

Legal writing should be in plain English

“There are two things wrong with most legal writing. One is style. The other is content.”

[Fred Rodell, Dean of Yale Law School]

A school teacher would tell the students not to write “I have a dog. And a cat. And a deer.” But, as we will discuss later, the use of “and” and “but” to begin a sentence is in fact a mark of good writing.

One problem in law school is that we read older cases by judges. A judge may write:

“The appellant complains that the trial court erred in holding that an attorney at law representing a bank could refuse to answer questions on the ground that to answer would disclose a confidential communication to his client; and that the trial court erred in holding that a garnishee ordered by the court to appear for examination as to his indebtedness to the judgment debtor was the witness of the judgment creditor and could not be called for cross-examination by the latter.”

This is just a random example. It could be translated into plain English fairly easily. It could be re-stated in two sentences, and contain about half of the number of words used.

Casebooks. Cases are selected for casebooks because they illustrate the precepts of law

concerned. Many of these cases are wordy, redundant, and confusing. Some of such Legal writing hardly changed from Norman times.

Statutes. Statutes are probably the champions of unfathomability,. Here is a sentence from a statute:

“Subject to division (B)(4) of this section, if, within six years of the offence, the offender has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one violation of division (A) or (B) of section 45 the Code, a municipal ordinance relating to operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or alcohol and a drug of abuse, … section 29 of the Code in a case in which the offender was subject to the sanctions described in division (D) of that section, …”

The sentence is unreadable.

Do not “Make it more lawyerlike”

One of the students was working part-time for a big firm. She wrote a letter for a senior partner. It was returned with “make it more lawyerlike,” i.e. more unreadable. Old ideas die hard. Legal writing has been bad for a long time.

As lawyers, what we do most is write. Sometimes, we fail to remember the first object of writing — to communicate. The advice given by Judge Painter is as follows:

1. Know your audience

If the judge is an expert on the law on your issue, then the facts are all the judge should need to process the argument.

If you are before a brand-new judge who practised probate law for twenty years, then, your brief should contain a more fundamental discussion of the law.

We are concerned mainly with persuasive writing. Communicate clearly what it is you are trying to persuade the other person to do.

2. Context before detail

Put the important material up front. Readers understand much more easily if they have a context.

The judge knows only what is set out in the pleadings. Strive to explain the case in a way that an average person can understand it.

Make it easy for the reader. Explain your case in the first two or three pages. Have a nonlawyer read your statement, and see if he can tell you what the case is about.

Put context before details. Do not start out giving facts about your case without giving the context. Tell the reader what kind of case it is. And the most important part is framing the issue. Let the reader know what the case is about.

3. Frame the issue in fewer than 75 words

The most important part of your brief, is framing the issue. What is the question you are trying to answer for the court? What do you want the court to decide?

You need to have a succinct statement of what the case is about. And you must do this in 50-75

words. Put your issue statement right up front, preferably in the first paragraph. An example:

“Jones was fired from her job with Environ Co. because she consulted a lawyer about a possible case against the Company. If workers are in fear of losing their livelihood, they cannot exercise any of their legal rights.”

4. State the facts succinctly

Be concise. The fewer the words, the more memorable the point: “I have nothing to offer but blood, tears, toil and sweat.”

5. Most dates are not important

There is nothing wrong with stating the facts in chronological order. But when you write, do not fall into the habit of starting every sentence with a date.

Avoid over-chronicling. It is a common mistake to start out by reciting a chronology of facts: “On March 23, 1999, this happened, then on May 6, 1999, this happened.”

This approach confuses the reader, because he does not know what facts are important, and what dates he should remember.

As a general rule, most dates are not important. If an exact date is not important, leave it out. Instead, tell us only the material facts, and why they are important. Say “in June” rather than “on June 14, 2000,” or worse, “on or about …”— this is not an indictment. Tell what the case is about; only the material facts and why they are important.

6. Headlines are signposts

Headings should tell the reader what is coming. Example: “The Fire and Aftermath” tells the reader the nature of the facts that are coming. Headings are signposts that guide the reader. The reader needs breaks in digesting complex material. Separate the parts into headings.

7. Write short paragraphs

Short paragraphs give the reader a chance to pause and digest what has gone before. It is enough to put three or four sentences in each paragraph.

Each sentence refers back to something in the last sentence. That is called building on context—building on prior knowledge.

8. Form is important

Obviously, the substance of the case is most important. But to communicate the substance, use the best form possible.

It is so much easier nowadays to make the document look good. Always use a serif type for text. A serif type is best for text. A sans serif type is good for headings. Ariel is a common sans-serif type.

9. Check your document carefully

Check every page of every paper that leaves your desk. It is amazing how many times pages are upside down or in the wrong order—or missing or blank pages. Your clerical staff may be good, but they are capable of mistakes.

10. Keep it short

You must strive to write succinctly. It is much harder to write a short document than a long one. It is a temptation to write all you know about the subject. Make every word count, and your document will be much more convincing.

11. Citations go in footnotes

Footnotes detract from readability. Encountering a footnote is like going downstairs to answer the door. If something is important enough to be in a footnote, it is important enough to be in the text. Your goal is to communicate. If you make your document look like a law review

article, it will be just as unreadable!

The only proper use for footnotes is to give citations. Make sure you put only citations in footnotes; that is, no “talking footnotes.” The reader does not need to read the footnotes. They are for reference only.

12. EDIT, EDIT, EDIT

Edit, edit, edit, and edit again. Typos, bad grammar, and misplaced paragraphs simply take away from your argument. Always do final edit.

With new technology, always come new pitfalls. Following the “spellcheck” or “grammarcheck” blindly leads to some weird words. Spellcheck can substitute wrong words. You may mean “constitution,” but spellcheck reads it as “constipation.” Probably the most common mistake is “the trail judge” [instead of the trial judge“].

13. Write short sentences

Write short, crisp sentences. Long sentences are especially difficult when strung together. Readability is the goal. Keep in mind the following comment about legal writing:

“The minute you read something and you can’t understand it, you can almost be sure that it was drawn up by a lawyer. Then if you give it to another lawyer to read and he doesn’t know just what it means, then you can be sure it was drawn up by a lawyer. If it is in a few words and is plain, and understandable only one way, it was written by a non-lawyer.”

14. Use mainly active voice

Sometimes you do not need to name the actor. Example: “Many books on this subject have been published.” Or a smooth transition from one sentence to the next, requires you to put the subject first. Or you might want to hide the

actor. Examples: “Mistakes were made;” “An accident occurred.”

Passive voice is not forbidden. But usually active voice is better; action is easier to understand. In the schoolyard, “Johnny tried to hit me.” Now, after law school, a lawyer would probably say, “An attempt was made by Johnny to assault me.”

15. Use “BUT” and “AND” to begin sentences

Do not be afraid to start sentences with “and” or “but.” This signifies good writing. The reason your school teacher told you not to start a sentence with “and” was because you wrote, “I have a mother. And a father. And a dog.”

Use “but” rather than “however” to start a sentence, and see how much better it reads.

16. Distinguish between “THAT” and “WHICH”

Use “that” restrictively, and “which” nonrestrictively. (In British English, “which” is used both ways.) The easy way to remember: “which” is preceded by a comma; “that” is not.

17. Use the DASH, PARENTHESIS, and COMMA for degrees of emphasis

You should avoid cluttering up your document with too many incidental comments. A dash provides the greatest emphasis — it is a stronger break. Next in degree is the parenthesis, then the comma.

18. One word is usually enough

Do not use two or three or four words for one (“devise and bequeath”; “grant, bargain, and sell”; “right, title, and interest”; “make, ordain, constitute, and appoint”). This goofiness originated with the Norman Conquest, after which it was necessary to use both the English and French words so that all could understand.

Most of us now understand plain English A tendency of lawyers is to use many words when one is more understandable:

sufficient number of” = enough “that point in time” = then “for the reason that” = because.

See a longer list in the Appendix below.

Don’t write “filed a motion” unless the filing itself has some significance. Write “moved.”

Do not write “On October 13, 1995, plaintiffappellant filed a timely appeal to this honorable court.”

“Smith appeals” is sufficient, unless the timeliness or date (or the honor of the court) is in question.

19. Avoid parenthetical numericals

A statement “There were two (2) defendants and three (3) police officers present” is extremely hard to read. Unless you believe the parties will alter your numbers. Skip this “noxious habit.”

The practice of spelling out numbers, and then attaching parenthetical numericals, is irritating. It was a habit learned when scribes used quill pens to copy documents. The real reason for this is to prevent fraud - by making it difficult to alter documents.

20. Hyphenate phrasal adjectives

The reader is confused by nouns acting as adjectives, or two adjectives together modifying one noun. Always hyphenate phrases like “wrongful-discharge suit,” or “public-policy exception.”

21. Always question “OF”

There is nothing wrong with possessive. Write “the court’s docket,” not “the docket of the court.”

22. Use the serial comma

In a list of three or more items, always insert the serial comma. Some writers insist on omitting the last comma before the “and.” Example: A, B, C, and D.

Do not omit the last comma—doing so can cause misinterpretation.

23. Avoid unnecessary preambles

Cut the useless preambles. Unnecessary preambles can weaken or hide the point they introduce. Some unnecessary preambles:

• It is important to add that . . .

• It may be recalled that . . .

• In this regard it is of significance that . . .

• It is interesting to note that…

But it is better to call the parties by name. When we use “plaintiff-appellant”, the reader must translate to understand what we mean. Using names, e.g., “Smithco,” sounds much more human than “Plaintiff-Appellant.”

Be consistent. Do not switch back and forth between “appellant”, “Jones”, and “plaintiff.” Do not write: “Defendant-Appellant Mary Jones (hereinafter usually referred to as Jones).” Just write – once - : “Defendant-Appellant Mary Jones (Jones).”

And just write — once — “Plaintiff-Appellant Amalgamated Widgets of North America, Inc. (Amalgamated),” not “hereinafter called”. And if your party is John Smith, you may call him Smith.

26. Use quotations sparingly

24.

Purge

Legalese: No “Hereinafter,” “aforesaid,”

and the like

Eschew legalese i.e. language used by lawyers that is difficult for most people to understand. “Hereinafter,” “aforesaid,” and the like, do not add anything but wordiness and detract from readability.

Use Latin phrases sparingly. A few—res ipsa loquitur [Let thing speak for itself], respondeat superior [Let the principal answer]—are perhaps acceptable, but do not litter your opinion with what Daniel Webster called “mangled pieces of murdered Latin.”

Cut out “such,” such as “such motion.” “The” or “that” almost always works. “Pursuant to” usually may be translated as “under.”

25. Call the parties by name

Do not go through your whole document calling parties “plaintiff-appellant” and “defendantappellee”, or the like. ‘Appellant’ would be enough.

Some documents contain strings of quotations. You should explain how the cited cases support your theory of the case. Do not use lengthy quotations—a few lines at most.

Unless the case you are quoting from is exactly on point (which is very seldom true), just quote the most relevant and persuasive part. Just remember, long blocks are not read.

Paraphrase what the quote says. The reader will actually read it to see if you are telling the truth.

27. Use persuasive language

Use persuasive language. Similes or metaphors are very effective to illustrate your analysis.

28. Continue your research

You might file a document months before it is argued before the court. Check every citation periodically, and again the day before the case is argued. It has happened that a new case has appeared in the interim.

Words and Phrases

Words and Phrases PLAIN ENGLISH

the means by which how entered a contract to contracted filed a counterclaim counterclaimed filed a motion moved filed an application applied adequate number of enough for the reason that because in the event of if in light of the fact that because notwithstanding the fact that although notwithstanding despite cause of action claim in order to to at this point in time now until such time as until whether or not whether (usually) during the month of May in May by means of by as a consequence of because of a distance of five miles five miles at a later date later is of the opinion that believes effectuate cause in violation of violates is violative of violates made a complaint complained utilize use a period of a week a week made application applied made provision provided it is contended by plaintiff plaintiff contends with regard to about in connection with with performed a search on searched each and every either one provide responses respond offer testimony testify make inquiry ask provide assistance help place a limitation upon limit make an examination of examine provide protection to protect reach a resolution resolve bears a significant resemblance resembles reveal the identity of identify makes mention of mentions are in compliance with comply make allegations allege was in conformity with conformed to effect settlement settle

[Source: Adapted from an article “Legal Writing” by Judge Mark P. Painter – an American judge, an outstanding US legal scholar, and an Adjunct Professor.]

SHARIAH LAW CORNER

Ada satu ketika saya dihubungi seorang anak guam yang ingin saya selesaikan pembahagian harta pusaka ibunya yang baru sahaja meninggal dunia. Langkah pertama yang saya nasihatkan adalah dengan memfailkan permohonan Sijil Faraid di Mahkamah Syariah sebelum meneruskan prosiding Geran Surat Kuasa Mentadbir di Mahkamah Tinggi Sivil. Berdasarkan keterangan yang diambil daripada anak guam, ibunya meninggalkan waris-waris seperti berikut :-

1) seorang anak perempuan (anak guam); 2) seorang kakak kandung; dan 3) seorang abang kandung.

Situasi di atas kedengaran biasakan? Ruparupanya tidak seperti yang saya jangkakan. Tiga hari selepas permohonan Sijil Faraid difailkan di Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Johor Bahru, saya dihubungi kakak kandung si mati (makcik kepada anak guam) yang menuduh saya memulakan tindakan tanpa usul periksa. Kata beliau, anak guam saya adalah anak yang derhaka kerana tidak pernah menjenguk ibunya sehingga ibunya menghembuskan nafas yang terakhir dan oleh itu anak guam saya tidak layak untuk mewarisi harta ibunya. Dan katanya lagi, rumah atas nama ibu anak guam saya yang beliau diami sekarang adalah milik beliau kerana beliau yang menjaga si mati semasa sakit.

By Zaimil Hasra Binti Zainal

Saya terdiam seketika sambil cuba menyusun ayat supaya dapat meredakan kemarahan beliau. Akhirnya saya berkata, “Maaf Puan… hanya ada 3 sebab anak guam saya tidak berhak mewarisi harta ibunya, yang pertama jika dia hamba, kedua jika dia berlainan agama dan ketiga jika dia yang menyebabkan kematian ibunya, boleh puan beritahu saya yang mana satu?”.

Kali ini beliau pula terdiam tetapi tidak lama, beliau terus menambah cerita keburukan anak guam satu persatu sehingga akhirnya saya tutup perbualan dengan meminta beliau melantik peguam untuk membantah kepada permohonan sijil faraid anak guam saya.

Apabila sampai tarikh bicara Sijil Faraid yang ditetapkan, Mahkamah memaklumkan bahawa terdapat satu permohonan Sijil Faraid juga difailkan oleh makcik anak guam di satu negeri lain dan prosiding terpaksa ditangguhkan sementara menunggu keputusan jawatankuasa Mahkamah Syariah di Putrajaya. Seminggu berlalu, akhirnya saya dimaklumkan bahawa permohonan makcik anak guam ditolak dan permohonan anak guam saya dibenarkan. Syukur Alhamdulillah.

Selepas Geran surat kuasa mentadbir diperolehi, akhirnya anak guam menceritakan bahawa beliau sememangnya tidak pernah menjenguk ibunya sejak berumur 3 tahun kerana ibu dan bapanya berpisah. Dia dijaga oleh bapanya yang tidak membenarkan dia berjumpa ibu sehingga ke akhir hayat ibunya. Dia mengaku dia tidak dapat berjasa semasa hayat ibunya maka dia berhasrat untuk membalas jasa ibu dengan menguruskan harta pusaka ibu dengan cepat. Dan sememangnya itulah yang dituntut oleh agama kerana bimbang berlakunya faraid berlapis apabila ada waris yang meninggal dunia.

Rumah yang didiami oleh makcik, beliau serahkan sepenuhnya kepada makcik manakala harta tidak alih yang terdiri daripada wang simpanan dan pelaburan dibahagi sama rata antara makcik dan pakciknya. Pendek kata, anak guam saya tidak menerima apa-apa dari bahagian faraid beliau. Saya bertanya, “betul ke ni, nak bagi semua pada makcik dan pakcik?”.

Jawabnya, “Ya, betul puan, saya menolak bahagian saya ke atas harta pusaka ibu saya”. Memang niat saya nak uruskan je, bukan nak bolot harta, saya pun dah maafkan semua tuduhan makcik saya, takpalah yang penting ibu saya tenang di sana”.

Berakhir sudah pembahagian harta pusaka di mana faraid bukanlah satu-satunya penyelesaian kepada pembahagian harta pusaka di sisi Islam, muafakat atau juga dikenali sebagai takharuj juga merupakan jalan terbaik sekiranya waris-waris boleh bermuafakat dan berdamai.

Firman Allah SWT dalam Surah al-Nisa’ ayat 128:

Yang bermaksud: “maka tiadalah salah bagi mereka membuat perdamaian (secara yang sebaik-baiknya), kerana perdamaian itu lebih baik.”

Real Property Gains Tax 2022 (Finance Act 2021)

By Yang Pei Keng 29 November 2022

Some important amendments have been made to the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [RPGT Act] pursuant to The Finance Act 2021 [Act833]. The Act was gazetted last year on 31 December 2021. It came into force this year on 1 January 2022

Changes made in Rates of RPGT

Every citizen or permanent resident is now exempt from payment of RPGT [0%] when he disposes of his property after 5 or more years of acquisition. As for any disposal within the first 5 years of acquisition, the previous rates before 2022 still apply.

All companies [whether foreign companies or Malaysian companies] have to pay a minimum rate of 10% RPGT after 5 years of acquisition.

A. New rates of RPGT effective from 1 January 2022

(1) Citizens: 0% RPGT payable for disposal after 5 years of acquisition

From 1 January 2022, every citizen or permanent resident selling or disposing of his real property after 5 years after acquisition of the property need not pay any RPGT [i.e. from the 6th year onwards].

This is a boon for any citizen or permanent resident selling his real property now. He does not have to pay any RPGT any more if he sells or disposes of his real property after keeping it for after 5 or more years after acquisition.

[Before amendment, even a citizen or permanent resident had to pay at least 5% RPGT if he sold or disposed of his real property after 5 or more years of acquisition. No matter how long the property had been kept, a minimum of 5% RPGT had to be paid upon disposal of the property. Such requirement has been criticised as it does not make any distinction between genuine investment and speculation.]

(2) Non-citizens: 10% RPGT payable after 5 years of acquisition

A non-citizen or a non-permanent resident still has to pay at least 10% RPGT upon disposal of his property more than 5 years after acquisition.

There is therefore a distinction between citizens/ permanent residents and non-citizens. Only citizens and permanent residents are entitled to be exempt from payment of RPGT upon disposal of any property after 5 or more years after acquisition.

It is commonplace that most of the foreigners delve into property market in Malaysia for the purpose of indulging in speculative activities. Thus, few would complain about the imposition of RPGT on any disposal by foreigners after 5 years of acquisition of the property.

(3) Companies: at least 10% RPGT payable after 5 years of acquisition

Every company has to pay at least 10% RPGT if it disposes of any real property more than 5 years after acquisition. It does not have the benefit of exemption of payment of RPGT.

“company” refers to both Malaysian company and foreign company. A “Malaysian company” is a company incorporated in Malaysia. A “foreign company” means a company NOT incorporated in Malaysia; it may be incorporated in any foreign country.

In the case of a foreign company, the disposal of any real property attracts a flat rate of 30% RPGT for the first 5 years of acquisition

If a company disposes of its real property in the 6th year onwards, that is, after 5 or more years after acquisition, it is liable to pay a minimum rate of 10% RPGT. No matter how long the company may have kept the property, say 10 or more years, it is still liable to pay the minimum rate of 10% RPGT.

For ease of reference, the new rates of RPGT payable in 2022 for disposal of real property are shown in Schedule A below:

Schedule 1

Rates of RPGT 2022 [new] Disposal Citizen + PR Malaysian Co. Foreign Co. +Non-citizen

First 3 years 30% 30% 30% 4th year 20% 20% 30% 5th year 15% 15% 30%

After 5 years 0% 10% 10%

Points to note:

1) Every disposer has to pay 30% RPGT for disposal in the first 3 years after acquisition.

2) In the 4th year, a citizen or a permanent resident, or a Malaysian company has to pay the reduced rate of only 20%. But a foreigner or a foreign company, still has to pay the highest rate of 30% in the 4th and 5th year.

3) In the 5th year, a citizen or a permanent resident, or a Malaysian company need only to pay a further reduced rate of 15%.

4) Therefore, throughout the first 5 years, a foreigner or a foreign company must pay the highest rate of 30%.

5) But a citizen or a permanent resident has the benefit of not paying any RPGT [0%] after 5 or more years of acquisition.

6) A Malaysian company pays the same rates of RPGT as a citizen for the first 4 years; that is, 30% for the first 3 years; and subsequently 20% - 15% for the 4th year and 5th year respectively.

7) But, after 5 or more years of acquisition, all companies [whether Malaysian or foreign] must pay at least 10%.

8) Throughout the first 5 years of acquisition, a foreign company or a foreigner has to pay the highest rate of 30% RPGT.

9) Take note: After 5 or more years after acquisition, any disposal by any company still attracts at least 10% RPGT.

By way of comparison, the RPGT rates payable before amendment by the Finance Act 2021, that is, the RPGT rates for last year 2021, is appended below:

Schedule 2

Disposal

Rates of RPGT 2021 [old]

Citizen + PR Malaysian Co.

Foreign Co. +Non-citizen

First 3 years 30% 30% 30%

4th year 20% 20% 30% 5th year 5% 15% 0%

After 5 years 5% 10% 10%

The only difference between the previous 2021 RPGT rates and the new 2022 RPGT rates is: that under the new 2022 RPGT rates, citizens and permanent residents are exempt from payment of RPGT [that is , 0% RPGT]; whereas in 2021 or earlier on, they had to pay at least 5% RPGT on disposal of property even after 5 or more years of acquisition.

B. 2022 - Retention sums to be remitted to IRB

The Finance Act 2021 has also made changes to the amount of retention sum for RPGT to be remitted to the Inland Revenue Board [IRB] on disposal of any real property within 60 days of signing the Sale and Purchase Agreement.

[Before amendment, for citizens, the retention sum was 3%; and for non-citizens it was a higher rate of 7%.]

After amendment, from year 2022 onwards, the changes in the retention sums payable on disposal of property is shown in Schedule 3 below:

Schedule 3

2022 – RPGT retention sums payable Party Disposal Rate

1. Citizen and PR always 3%

2. Malaysian company … first 3 years 5% … after 3 years 3%

3. Foreign Company always 7%

4. Non-citizen and non-PR always 7%

Points to note:

1. After amendment, for citizens and permanent residents, the retention sum remains at 3%.

2. For non-citizens and non-permanent residents, the retention sum is always 7% regardless of the number of years the property has been kept after acquisition.

3. Under the Finance Act 2021, a distinction is made between Malaysian companies and foreign companies as far as the amount of retention sum is concerned.

4. For a Malaysian company, any disposal within the first 3 years of acquisition, the retention sum is 5%. [This is something new] But any disposal more than 3 years after acquisition, the retention sum is reduced to 3% only - the same rate as payable by citizens]

5. A foreign company has to pay 7% retention sum.

6. Similarly, a non-citizen or a non-permanent resident must always pay 7% when he disposes of his real property.

Retention sums: depend on 2 factors

The amount of retention sum to be remitted to the IRB upon disposal of any property now depends on 2 factors:

(a) The period of time the property has been kept before disposal; and

(b) The citizenship status of the disposer: whether he is a Malaysian citizen, a permanent resident, or a non-citizen or non-permanent resident; and whether it is a Malaysian company or a foreign company.

[Before amendment, a fixed rate of 3% retention sum had to be remitted by a citizen to the IRB. But a foreigner had to pay a higher rate of 5% retention sum.]

Now, after the signing of the SPA [sale and purchase agreement], in order to determine the amount of retention sums, the citizenship status of the seller/disposer has to be ascertained first.

1. Malaysian citizens and PRs and Malaysian companies

A Malaysian citizen or a permanent resident has to pay only 3% retention sum. But a Malaysian company has to pay a higher rate of 5% retention sum for the first 3 years of acquisition. This is something new in 2022.

But for any disposal from the 4th year onwards after acquisition, a Malaysian company, like a Malaysian citizen, pays the lower rate of 3% retention sum.

2. Foreigners and foreign companies – must always pay 7% retention sum

A higher rate of retention sum of 7% retention sum is always imposed on a foreigner or a nonpermanent resident or a foreign company for disposal of any property at any time. No matter how long the property has been kept after acquisition before it is disposed, 7% retention sum is always payable by foreigners.

Conclusion:

Obviously, the Finance Act 2021 has made a distinction between citizens and PRs as well as Malaysian companies on the one hand; and

non-citizens and non-PRs as well as foreign companies on the other. The rate of retention sums [3%] payable by citizens; and Malaysian companies [3% - 5%] are always less than those payable by foreigners or foreign companies [7%]. The special feature is that a Malaysian company has to pay 5% retention sum for disposal within the first 3 years. After the 3-year period, only 3% has to be paid, the same as rate payable by a citizen.

But a foreign company must always pay a higher rate of 7% retention sum for disposal of property no matter how long it has kept the property after acquisition.]

Investment is not speculation

A Malaysian individual may acquire property for a long-term investment. He may keep the property for more than 5 or more years before disposal. Such acquisition of property ought to be regarded as an investment. It is certainly not speculation. To treat it as speculation is devoid of common sense.

It is only fair and reasonable not to impose any RPGT on him for investing in the property for a long period of time.

The recent amendments to the RPGT Act are certainly welcome by citizens and permanent residents. They may now invest in real property since he does not have to worry about payment of RPGT after investing in any real property for more than 5 years.

Non-citizens must pay 10% after 5 years of acquisition

Some have expressed the erroneous view that Budget Speech 2022 has granted exemption of payment of RPGT for all individuals, including citizens or non-citizens, permanent residents or non-permanent residents, if they dispose of any property after 5 or more years of acquisition.

This is a misleading statement or misinformation. It causes confusion among foreigners. It may create a wrong impression as well as a false hope that foreigners are also exempt from payment of RPGT on disposal of property after 5 or more years of acquisition.

This is far from the truth. The Finance Minister merely stated in the Budget Speech 2022: “The Government will not impose Real Property Gains Tax from the disposal of real property in the 6th year onwards by Malaysian citizens, permanent residents, other than companies.” Obviously, foreigners [non-citizens] will NOT be exempt from payment of RPGT when they dispose of their property after 5 or more years of acquisition. That is to say, a foreigner is still liable to pay at least 10% RPGT, no matter how long he has kept the property before disposal.

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

52ND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE JOHORE BAR

On

Ten Committee members were elected namely Pn Norhayati Mohamed, Ms Helen Fong Soh Lan, Mr Danny Loo Kheng Soon, Ms Kamala a/p Ganapathy Rajagopalan, Ms R Anusha a/p Ragvan, Ms Archana a/p Tambe Raja, Cik Aimi Syarizad binti Datuk Hj Kuthubul Zaman, Cik Anis Syarizad binti Datuk Hj. Kuthubul Zaman, Mr Pang Yong Tong and En Syahril Anuar bin Harun.

Pn Hajah Norfaizah binti Hj Zainuddin was co-opted as committee member.

En. Muhammad Zahier bin Rosli was appointed as the Honorary Secretary.

25th February 2022, the Johore Bar’s 52nd Annual General Meeting (“AGM”) was held at Holiday Villa Hotel, Johor Bahru. 85 members attended. Mr R Jayabalan was elected as the Chairman of the Johore Bar and Pn. Shahareen Begum as the representative to the Bar Council.

ACTIVITIES

COURTESY CALL ON THE JUDGES AND JUDICIAL COMMISSIONERS OF THE HIGH COURT AT JOHOR BAHRU

JOHORE

HARI RAYA AIDILFITRI OPEN HOUSE

AT JOHOR BAHRU AND MUAR

On 17th & 26th May 2022, the Johore Bar hosted its Hari Raya Aidilfitri open house at Muar, Johor and Johor Bahru respectively for members of the Bar and pupils in chambers.

BLOOD DONATION CAMPAIGN AT MUAR, JOHOR

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

Johore Bar

The North Johore Affairs Sub Committee together with Kelab Sukan dan Kebajikan Mahkamah Muar, in collaboration with the Blood Bank, Sultanah Fatimah Specialist Hospital, organised the Blood Donation Campaign at the Muar Court Complex on 9 Aug 2022.

WELCOMING HIGH TEA FOR JOHOR BAHRU HIGH COURT JUDGE AND JUDICIAL COMMISSIONERS OF THE HIGH COURT IN JOHOR BAHRU

On 16 Aug 2022, the Johore Bar Social Sub Committee organized a High-Tea at Grand Paragon Hotel, Johor Bahru to welcome YA Datuk Aslam bin Zainuddin, YA Tuan Ahmad Murad bin Abdul Aziz, YA Dato’ Sri Shamsulbahri Bin Haji Ibrahim, YA Puan Noor Hayati Binti Haji Mat and YA Tuan Noor Hisham Bin Ismail, who had been posted to Johor Bahru High Court. The event was attended by 90 over members.

DEEPAVALI OPEN HOUSE AT JOHOR BAHRU AND MUAR

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

Johore Bar

On 1 Nov and 3 Nov 2022, the Johore Bar hosted Deepavali open house at Muar and Johor Bahru respectively for members of the Bar and pupils in chambers.

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

INTRODUCTION TO REAL PROPERTY GAINS TAX: A CONVEYANCER’S APPROACH

On 22 Sept 2022, the Johore Bar North Johore Affairs Sub Committee organised a seminar on Introduction to Real Property Gains Tax at Muar Johor presented by Mr. Roger Lo Ming. A total of 56 persons attended the seminar.

SEXUAL OFFENCES AND CRIMINAL TRIAL

On 30 Sept 2022, the Johore Bar North Johore Affairs Sub Committee organised a seminar on Sexual Offences And Criminal Trial at Kluang Johor presented by Mr Salim Bashir. A total of 32 persons attended the seminar.

DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS FOR BEGINNERS

WELCOMING HIGH TEA FOR YA PUAN WONG MEE

LING, JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER OF THE HIGH COURT IN JOHOR BAHRU

On 24 Nov 2022, the Johore Bar Young Lawyers And Chambering Pupils Sub Committee organised a seminar on Divorce Proceedings For Beginners presented by Ms J Chandrika. A total of 45 persons attended the seminar.

On 29 Nov 2022, the Johore Bar Social Charity & Welfare Sub Committee organised a High Tea at Holiday Villa Hotel, Johor Bahru to welcome YA Puan Wong Mee Ling, who had been posted at the Johor Bahru High Court.

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

ADVOCACY TRAINING COURSE

On 30 Sept and 1 Oct 2022, the Bar Council Advocacy Training Committee in collaboration with the Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee held the Advocacy Training Course for members of the Johore Bar. The course was conducted at the Criminal High Court. A total of 18 members participated were divided into groups of six with two trainers per group. The trainers were Pn Shahareen Begum,

Johore Bar

Mr Ooi Huey Miin, Mr Harvinder Singh, Puteri Shehnaz Majid, Mr David Mathews and Mr John Skelchy.

JOHORE BAR ACTIVITIES

INTRODUCTION TO REAL PROPERTY GAINS TAX: A CONVEYANCER’S APPROACH

On

ELIMINATING DEATHS IN CUSTODY

On 4 Nov 2022, the Johore Bar Human Rights Sub Committee organised a workshop on Eliminating Deaths in Custody presented by Mr M Visvanathan, Mr Yohendra Nadarajan and Mr. V. Sanjay Nathan.

27 Oct 2022, the Johore Bar Continuing Professional Development Sub Committee organised a seminar on Introduction to Real Property Gains Tax presented by Mr. Roger Lo Ming. A total of 37 persons attended the seminar.

Yoga session for Members

Bar Council | Nationwide AMLA Compliance Training

Johore Bar

The Building, House, Library and Member’s Welfare Sub – Committee has organised a Yoga session for members on 1 June 2022

The nationwide AMLA Compliance training was held at Johore Bar on 24 June 2022. The speakers are Mr. Babu Raj and Ms. Ganeswary Palaniapan.

REFERENCE PROCEEDINGS IN MEMORIAM

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

- SUPPIAH A/L PAKRISAMY

- DATUK FREDDIE LONG HOO HIN

- JOHN ANG SOON HO

- MOHD FAIRUZ BIN MAHMOOD

- YAP SIONG CHENG

- MAR SZE WEI

- REGINALD VALLIPURAM

- GANESON A/L GUNATHAN

- AZMI BIN AHMAD BAKRI

- ARWA BINTI HJ. ABDUL RAHMAN

- DATO’ TEO SAY KOON

- HAJI NOORDIN BIN HUSSIN

A Reference in their memory was held at the Johor Bahru High Court on 19th, 29th & 31st May 2022.

The three days proceedings were presided over by the Honourable Justice Datuk Aslam bin Zainuddin, Honourable Judicial Commissioners Dato’ Sri Shamsulbahri bin Haji Ibrahim and Tuan Ahmad Murad bin Abdul Aziz. Senior Federal Counsel, Puan Zahilah binti Mohammad Yusoff represented the Attorney General’s Chambers. Puan Shahareen Begum, Representative of the Bar Council, Members of the Bar and family members of the twelve departed members were present. The proceedings were then followed by a reception.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HONOURABLE JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER, DATO’ SRI SHAMSULBAHRI BIN HAJI IBRAHIM ON THURSDAY, 19TH MAY 2022 AT THE JOHOR BAHRU HIGH COURT

INTRODUCTORY SPEECH BY MR. R JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR

Dengan izin Yang Arif, saya R Jayabalan hadir mewakili Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor. Rakan bijaksana saya Puan Shahareen Begum hadir mewakili Majlis Peguam, Bar Malaysia dan Pn Zahilah Mohammad Yusoff, Pengarah Guaman Johor hadir mewakili Jabatan Peguam Negara. Saya memohon kebenaran untuk meneruskan dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lord, we are gathered today before this Honourable Court for a special occasion to recall, reminisce and celebrate the life and memories of four of our departed members of the Bar and to pay our respects as professional colleagues.

They are the late Mr Suppiah Pakrisamy, Datuk Freddie Long Hoo Hin, Mr John Ang Soon Ho and the late En Mohd Fairuz bin Mahmood.

My learned friends Datuk Dr Abdul Raman Saad, Mr Ang Boon Heng, Mr S. Gunasegaran and Hajah Norfaizah binti Hj Zainuddin are appearing to deliver the tribute to the departed members respectively.

May I also put on record the presence of members of the Bar, relatives and friends of the departed members at the gallery today to witness this solemn proceedings.

Firstly, on behalf of the Johore Bar I would like to express our appreciation to Your Lordship for kindly accepting the Johore Bar’s request to hold this reference proceedings and also for presiding the proceedings today.

Reference proceedings is an ancient practice of the Bar. It is unique to the legal profession. We welcome new entrants into the legal profession in the presence of the Bar, the Bench and the

AGC by way of Long Call proceedings, and when they leave us permanently, the Bar, Bench and the AGC once again come together to recall the member’s life at the Bar and we bid our farewell as professional colleagues. It is the joint efforts like this between the Bar and the Bench that is keeping the traditions of the Bar alive and in the process adds value and prestige to the legal profession itself.

The purpose and significance of reference proceedings was aptly put by the former President of the Malaysian Bar Datuk Dr Cyrus Das at the reference proceedings held for the eminent counsel, the late Dato’ Ronald Khoo before the Federal Court Judge His Lordship Edgar Joseph Jr on 24.4.1998. This is what the learned counsel said:

“The practice of references for deceased judges and lawyers served to remind us that we belong to one body with one objective, namely, the pursuit of justice through the legal process. In that collective effort, governed by the unwritten rules of etiquette and tradition which are just as important as the written ones, the death of one of us diminishes the whole, and so we gather to mourn the loss, to pay tribute and remind ourselves that - the journey must be made and the faith must be kept”.

That is indeed our objective today as well. My learned friends will now begin with their respective tribute to the departed members.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE SUPPIAH A/L PAKRISAMY

BY DATUK DR ABDUL RAMAN SAAD

dan kotaraya Singapura telah bertukar nama kepada “Syonan-to” (“Light of the South”).

Semasa pemerintahan Jepun, pembelajaran ramai anak muda termasuk mendiang telah tergendala dan mereka telah dikerah untuk menghadiri sekolah pertukangan di Geylang Road.

Setelah tamat pemerintahan Jepun di Singapura, British mengambil alih pemerintahan dan pada tahun 1945 mendiang meneruskan pembelajaran di Victoria Secondary School, Singapura.

Dengan izin Yang Arif

Yang Berusaha Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Peguam Johor Bahru, Encik R Jayabalan. Wakil daripada Majlis Peguam, Puan Shahareen Begum.

Yang Berusaha wakil daripada Peguam Negara, Puan Zahilah Mohammad Yusoff, Pengarah Guaman Johor.

Kita berkumpul pada pagi yang mulia ini adalah untuk memberikan penghormatan kepada mendiang Suppiah Pakrisamy yang juga dikenali ramai sebagai P. Suppiah.

Mendiang P. Suppiah telah dilahirkan di Singapura pada tahun 1930 yang dikenali sebagai Zaman Meleset (“The Great Depression”).

Semasa kelahiran mendiang, seorang tukang tilik telah memberitahu ayahanda mendiang bahawa anak kecil yang baru lahir ini akan hidup sehingga umur 72 tahun. Walau bagaimanapun, andaian tukang tilik tersebut silap kerana hayat mendiang adalah sehingga beliau berumur 89 tahun (mendiang meninggal dunia pada 3 Ogos 2019)

Mendiang P. Suppiah telah beramal sebagai Peguambela dan Peguamcara lebih 55 tahun, iaitu satu jangka hayat yang agak panjang jika dibandingkan purata 80% daripada Ahli Majlis Peguam yang sedia ada. Mendiang mendapat pendidikan awal bermula pada tahun 1936 di Rangoon Road School di Singapura, dan kemudian di McNair School. Seterusnya, pendidikan menengah di Monk’s Hill Secondary School. Walau bagaimanapun, pengajian awal mendiang terganggu akibat penaklukan tentera Jepun yang tiba di Singapura pada 15 Februari 1942

Walau bagaimanapun, peristiwa penaklukan tentera Jepun dan pengambilalihan pemerintah oleh British di Singapura bukan alasan keciciran pendidikan apabila mendiang berjaya lulus peperiksaan Senior Cambridge Examination pada tahun 1954, dan melanjutkan pendidikan ke sekolah undang-undang, di England.

Mendiang telah menamatkan pengajian undangundang di Lincoln’s Inn, London dan telah diterima masuk dan didaftarkan sebagai Peguambela & Peguamcarsa di English Bar pada tahun 1959.

Mendiang memulakan kerjayanya sebagai Pelatih Dalam Kamar di firma guaman, M. Ismail & Co di bawah pengawasan dan tunjuk ajar Pupil Master, K. Visvalingam.

Mendiang diterima masuk dan didaftarkan sebagai peguambela dan peguamcara di Singapura pada tahun 1960 dan di Malaysia pada tahun 1961.

Pada tahun 1964, mendiang berhenti beramal sebagai peguam di firma M. Ismail & Co dan menyertai perkhidmatan tentera Malaysia selaku Pegawai Undang-undang dengan pangkat Kapten.

Mendiang telah menyertai perkhidmatan tentera Malaysia semasa Singapura masih sebahagian daripada Malaysia. Antara tugas-tugas mendiang selaku Pegawai Undang-undang Kementerian Pertahanan ialah menjalankan pendakwaan kes-kes tentera, mengubal undang-undang, menyediakan draf undang-undang, serta membuat pengubalan undang-undang serta memberi nasihat kepada Majlis Kementerian Pertahanan.

Mendiang meninggalkan perkhidmatan di Kementerian Pertahanan pada tahun 1969 dan beramal semula sebagai peguambela dan peguamcara di Johor Bahru dan Singapura.

Di Johor Bahru, mendiang sambung beramal sebagai peguam di Tetuan M. Ismail & Co dan beramal sebagi peguam sehingga akhir hayatnya.

Secara peribadi, saya mengenali mendiang selaku peguam di Johor Bahru pada tahun 1974 di mana beliau merupakan rakan kongsi di Tetuan Singh & Suppiah dan pada waktu itu saya merupakan seorang Majistret di Johor Bahru.

Mendiang menumpukan bidang litigasi, sivil dan jenayah sebagai bidang pilihan amalannya kerana minatnya yang mendalam khususnya dalam undangundang jenayah. Keberanian dan kelantangan berhujah menjadikan mendiang disegani dan dihormati ramai.

Mendiang sering dipuji dan diteladani kerana perjuangan mendiang mempertahankan anakguamnya. Sifat pantang undur untuk menegakkan keadilan, mencerminkan prinsip kukuh yang dimiliki oleh mendiang sebagai pengamal undang-undang yang disegani.

Dalam kerjaya, mendiang adalah antara peguam yang menjalankan kerjayanya di Singapura (mendiang mempunyai firma guamannya sendiri) dan di Johor Bahru. Mendiang komited dalam kerjayanya dengan sering berulang alik di antara Singapura dan Johor Bahru bagi menjalankan tugasnya selaku peguam.

Mendiang banyak mengendalikan kes berprofil tinggi di Singapura. Antaranya ialah pembelaan ke atas tiga pihak yang dituduh bagi kes pembunuhan di Pulau Senang dan juga kes profil tinggi “Gold Bar Murder” di Singapura dan anakguam beliau telah dilepask daripada pertuduhan setelah bersetuju untuk menjadi saksi pendakwaan.

Bermula pada 1 Mei 2002, mendiang menyertai Tetuan Abdul Raman Saad & Associates (“ARSA”) sebagai Konsultan selama 17 tahun dan memberi tunjuk ajar serta melatih peguam-peguam ARSA dalam bidang litigasi dan sivil.

Mendiang juga memainkan peranan aktif dengan melibatkan diri dalam aktiviti Majlis Peguam dan juga merupakan Pengerusi Johor Bar Committee pada tahun 2010 – 2011.

Mendiang bukan sahaja dikenali sebagai seorang peguam yang berwibawa, tetapi juga merupakan seorang yang berminat dalam sukan bola sepak dan

golf. Mendiang pernah menyandang Jawatan VicePresident Singapore Amateur Football Association pada tahun 1963/1964 dan juga Penasihat undangundang kepada Asian Football Federation. Selain daripada sukan bola sepak, mendiang juga seorang pemain golf dan pernah menjuarai beberapa pertandingan golf, antaranya pertandingan golf yang dianjurkan oleh Senior Golfers’ Society.

Pencapaian-pencapaian yang telah dicapai oleh mendiang semasa hayatnya telah memenuhi segala cita-cita, hasrat dan impiannya dalam kerjaya selaku peguam dan dalam minatnya terhadap sukan bola sepak dan golf.

Mendiang yang telah meninggal dunia pada 3 Ogos 2019, meninggalkan seorang balu dan dua orang anak.

Pemergian mendiang amant dirasai kerana mendiang dikenali di kalangan rakan-rakan sebagai seorang yang berperibadi baik, mudah dan disenangi. Mendiang sering memberi tunjuk ajar dengan ikhlas dan merupakan seorang yang baik hati.

Pemergian mendiang adalah diratapi oleh semua pihak, terutama keluarga, rakan-rakan peguam dan juga pemain-pemain golf di bandar ini.

Saya akhiri ucapan saya ini dengan satu peribahasa yang menggambarkan tauladan yang boleh diambil dari kisah mendiang iaitu “Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama” yang bermaksud kita hendaklah meningkatkan taraf sebagai pengamal undang-undang profesionalisme, dengan mengambil tauladan daripada mendiang yang mempunyai tahap profesionalisme yang tinggi dan berintergriti sebagai taulan bagi generasi sekarang dan akan datang.

Yang Arif, saya dengan hormatnya mengusulkan supaya Rekod Prosiding Memperingati ini disimpan di Arkib Mahkamah yang mulia ini dgn sesalinan diserahkan kepada keluarga mendiang yang kita kenang dan ingati pada prosiding hari ini. Terima kasih.

DR ABDUL RAMAN SAAD MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

DATUK

May it please My Lord,

The late Datuk Freddie Long Hoo Hin or he was affectionately known as Freddie Long read law in the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn, UK. He commenced his own practice on 22/4/1972 under the name and style of Messrs. HH Long & Co.

I had the privilege of knowing the late Datuk Freddie as he was both my master and employer. He was my master as I chambered with him in his firm and later on worked with him as his legal assistant. During my tenure of employment with him, Datuk Freddie mainly practiced in conveyancing works especially in banking documentation. At that time, unlike the present practice, one had to draft the legal documentation himself. Datuk Freddie was meticulous in his drafting works. Apart from his serious working attitude, he was kind and compassionate.

Datuk Freddie also had his heart to serve his country and his people. He stood as a candidate in the 7th General Election in 1986 in the then constituency of Gertak Merah and won in the said state election. He then served as elected member of the Johor State Legislative Assembly from 1986. His constituency of Gertak Merah was later renamed as Stulang, where Datuk Freddie went on to hold that constituency for a record consecutive 6 terms from 1986 to 2008. After the 11th General Election in 2004, he was appointed the Johor State Executive Councillor as the Chairman of the Tourism and Environment Committee.

In accordance with the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 1976, as a result of his appointment to the State Executive Council, his ceased to be a member of the Malaysian Bar. He resumed practice on 8/3/2008 after his official retirement from politics.

He believed absolutely in his own integrity and habitually disparaged the motives of those who disagreed with him. This rare moral certainty and unreflective self-righteousness was his greatest political strength in the muddy world of political expediency and compromise.

I had the privilege of working together with the late Datuk Freddie at a trial in 2011. Datuk Freddie was instructed as Counsel in a specific performance case in the High Court of Malaya in Johor Bahru. I was asked to assist him merely on the ground that he was not practicing in litigation for such a long time and that he needed me to assist him in civil procedure. My task as his assistant was simple as Datuk Freddie displayed his art of advocacy eloquently. As his usual self, he prepared the case diligently and meticulously. We won the case in the High Court. We also won on the Defendant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal, and leave to appeal to the Federal Court was refused.

As part of his aspiration to serve his people, after his official retirement from politics, apart from his legal practice, he became a Rotarian and member of the Freemason. He always believed in sharing his thoughts and experiences. He enjoyed friendship and he also enjoyed sharing life’s experience.

For his service to his country and his people, he was awarded the medal of PIS, AMN and PJN.

Datuk Freddie passed away peacefully on 4/11/2019 leaving behind his beloved wife Datin Coreen Lim Boon Lee and his affectionate children, Diana, Iris, Jonathan and Elizabeth and their spouses, other relatives and friends to remember him.

I would like to conclude by citing a Bible text appeared in Datuk Freddie’s obituary affectionately chosen by his family,

‘I have fought the good light. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. From now on there is reserved for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give me on that day, and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for this appearing.’

May God bless his soul.

ANG BOON HENG MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE DATUK FREDDIE LONG HOO HIN BY MR. ANG BOON HENG

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Saya S. Gunasegaran, akan menyampaikan penghormatan kepada mendiang John Ang Soon Ho. Rakan bijaksana saya Encik R. Jayabalan mewakili Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor, Rakan bijaksana saya Puan Shahareen Begum mewakili Majlis Peguam, Malaysia. Rakan bijaksana saya Puan Zaliha binti Mohammad Yusoff, Pengarah Guaman Johor mewakili Yang Berbahagia Peguam Negara Malaysia.

Yang Arif, saya pohon kebenaran untuk melanjutkan ucapan saya dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lord, I rise with a heavy heart today to address you on this solemn occasion convened to pay our last respects to 4 members of the Johore Bar who have completed their sojourn in this mortal world and left us for perhaps a better place.

A Reference is a special sitting of the High Court held for the purpose of honouring the memory of departed members of the Bar. A long-standing tradition of the Bar and is unique to the legal profession. It is one of the few occasions when the court sits other than to hear cases.

My Lord, kindly permit me to reflect, recollect and trace the life at the Bar of Mr JOHN ANG SOON HO (or JOHN ANG, as he is popularly known) and of his contribution to the profession.

JOHN ANG was born in Sibolga, North Sumatra, Indonesia on 12-08-1936. The family migrated to

Singapore when he was in primary school.

In Singapore he studied at the SJI Institute Singapore (Primary and Secondary) before proceeding to read law at the National University of Singapore, then known as the University of Singapore or SU. He graduated with the degree of LL.B. Hons. in 1962.

He was admitted to the Malaysian Bar on 15th July 1963, when I was in standard one, and had been in continuous practice till his demise on 11-10-2020, for a total of 57 years, making him one of the seniormost members of the Malaysian Bar and the 2nd on the seniority list of the Johore Bar.

In his early days he practised in Melaka at Sault & Co before shifting base to Johor Bahru around 1971-72. I understand that he did a fair bit of Litigation work in the beginning, including many pro bono cases. Later he was handling predominantly Conveyancing matters. He founded Messrs JOHN ANG & CO as a sole proprietorship, which later became JOHN ANG & JEGA, a partnership with Mr N. Jegatheeson. In 1993 I joined as a partner in the said firm and were soon followed by Ms Chandrika and Mr R. Jayabalan. In 2013 the firm was reconstituted and renamed as Messrs JOHN ANG & GUNA.

John Ang had been a Notary Public for a long time. He had served as the Johor Bar Representative to the Bar Council, member of the Johore Bar Committee, Chairman and member of the Disciplinary Committee for many years.

Although he resided in Singapore in the latter part of his career, he commuted dutifully across the causeway, driving daily to work in JB to attend to his clients until March 2020 when he was prevented from doing as a result of the closure at the Singapore – JB borders due to Covid 19. Despite his advanced age, he was still mentally sharp and physically active. He did not retire out of love for his profession.

I have had the privilege of knowing John Ang for 27 years, having practised in partnership with him throughout the said period. He had many interests. He was particularly passionate about golf. He played golf during his entire adult life in various golf courses in Malaysia and overseas. In the early years he participated in golf competitions and came home with a few winning trophies. He also enjoyed taking his daily evening walks in the nature parks in Singapore and around where he lived. He was also an avid sports fans, and used to follow and was up

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE JOHN ANG SOON HO BY MR. S GUNASEGARAN

to date regarding information on all sporting events, such as football, tennis, boxing, racing, etc.

Eating was another passion. He loved his food, good food and all food - Chinese, Western, Indian banana leaf and Padang. He was ever willing to travel the distance for a finger-licking good and hearty meal. He often travelled to Indonesia to savour his favourite Nasi Padang. When it came to Indian food, he always ate with his fingers. No fork and spoon. There was a time when I was providing him regular company for nasi daun pisang at his favourite Indian restaurant in town until I decided to decline his invitation because I was putting on weight tremendously while he remained slim. He would also every now and then get me the famous Masala Chicken from Samy’s Curry House in Singapore.

John Ang leaves behind his wife Madam Ho Soh Mui, 5 children (4 boys and a girl) and 7 grandchildren. His daughter and son-in-law have come from Singapore to attend this ceremony.

To his family, may I say that his passing away is sorrowful not just to you but to all of us who have known him over the years. It is as much a grief to us as it is for you. But we are reminded that Death is the common destiny that awaits all of us. Death is the inevitable consequence of birth. It is as natural and common as life. All life leads to death. And that the journey begins at birth. William Shakespeare described death as follows: “Thou know’st ‘tis common; all that lives must die Passing through nature to eternity.

(Hamlet, Act I, scene 2, line 72)

And Euripides said : “Death is a debt we all must pay.” My Lord, we comfort ourselves in the thought that although John Ang has left us, he will always remain in our memory. As George Eliot said: “Our dead are never dead to us, until we have forgotten them.

My Lord, we will remember John Ang as a polished and perfect gentleman, who was always courteous and respectful to everyone. He had no harsh words for anyone. I have never heard him speak ill of any, never seen him take advantage of any person or situation. He was always fair to those who had any dealings with him. This is the rare quality of the man that endeared him to all of us.

John Ang was also devoted to the profession till the end and gave his best to it. He adopted the highest professional standards in the practice of the law and has left a lasting impression on those of us who were privileged to have come into contact with him both professionally and socially.

My Lord, John Ang has led an honourable life and will always be remembered for his contribution to the Bar and to the cause of justice that this profession proudly stands for.

My Lord, may I respectfully move that the record of these proceedings be preserved in the archives of this Honourable Court and a copy thereof be extended to the bereaved family.

Much obliged My Lord.

GUNASEGARAN MEMBER OF JOHORE

Bismillahir Rahmannir Rahim

Dengan izin Yang Arif, Pada pagi ini kita semua diberi peluang untuk berkumpul di dalam dewan Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini untuk suatu majlis memperingati rakan-rakan peguam yang telah pergi mendahului kita, bertemu dengan Penciptanya.

Pada hari ini saya telah diberi penghormatan untuk membacakan memoir rujukan khas buat Allahyarham Encik Mohd Fairuz bin Mahmood atau di kalangan

S

BAR TRIBUTE FOR THE LATE MOHD FAIRUZ BIN MAHMOOD BY HAJAH NORFAIZAH BINTI HJ. ZAINUDDIN

kami para peguam, kami masih menggunakan panggilan “Tuan Fairuz” kepada Allahyarham ini.

Saya juga difahamkan wakil ahli keluarga Allahyarham juga hadir mengikuti memoir rujukan ini.

Allahyarham Encik Mohd Fairuz bin Mahmood telah dilahirkan pada 28hb Mei 1971 di Batu Pahat, Johor.

Sewaktu kematiannya, Allahyarham mempunyai seorang isteri bernama Puan Norliana binti Ibrahim dan Allahyarham mempunyai 5 orang cahaya mata iaitu Muhammad Alif Mustaqim bin Mohd Fairuz, 21 tahun, Siti Amirah Hakimah binti Mohd Fairuz, 20 tahun, Siti Aliyah Hazirah binti Mohd Fairuz, 17 tahun, Siti Arissa Hadeeqa binti Mohd Fairuz, 9 tahun dan Muhammad Akif Muqtadir bin Mohd Fairuz,8 tahun.

Allahyarham adalah graduan undang-undang dari Universiti Malaya. Setelah menamatkan pengajiannya, sekitar tahun 1998, Allahyarham telah menyertai badan kehakiman dengan memulakan tugasnya sebagai Majisteret, kemudian sebagai Penolong Kanan Pendaftar dan jawatan terakhirnya ialah sebagai Timbalan Pendaftar di Mahkamah Tinggi Johor Bahru. Saya percaya ramai di antara rakan-rakan peguam di sini yang pernah mengendalikan kes di hadapan Allahyarham pada ketika itu.

Setelah menabur jasa baktinya dalam bidang kehakiman, Allahyarham kemudian telah menamatkan perkhidmatannya sekitar tahun 2009 dan meneruskan kerjayanya di bidang guaman pula. Tanpa menoleh ke belakang lagi, selepas menamatkan Latihan Dalam Kamar, Allahyarham telah menjadi rakan kongsi di Tetuan Fairuz, Haniza & Associates sehingga tahun 2012 dan kemudiannya bekerja sebagai Legal Assisstant di Tetuan Mohd Akhir & Partners.

Ini adalah firma terakhir Allahyarham sebelum Allahyarham dipanggil pulang menghadap Tuhannya.

Yang Arif, Allahyarham meninggal dalam damai tengahari jam 12.07 pada 7hb Januari 2021 akibat komplikasi buah pinggang. Pemergian Allahyarham bukan sahaja dirasai oleh isteri, anak-anak dan ahli keluarganya sahaja, malah turut dirasai oleh rakan-rakan peguam terutama rakan-rakan yang rapat dengan beliau.

Masih dikenali sebagai “Tuan Fairuz” di kalangan sahabat-sahabat peguam walaupun setelah meninggalkan bidang kehakiman, Allahyarham sewaktu hayatnya terutamanya sewaktu bertugas

di Mahkamah, adalah seorang yang sentiasa memudahkan urusan pihak-pihak yang berurusan di hadapannya serta sedia membantu apabila diperlukan.

Sikap Allahyarham yang mudah didekati menjadikan sesiapa saja yang berurusan dengannya merasa senang dan selesa.

Semoga roh Allahyarham sentiasa dicucuri rahmat dengan mendapat keampunan tanpa syarat. Saya percaya Allahyarham akan sentiasa diingati oleh isteri, anak-anak dan ahli keluarganya serta tidak ketinggalan kita semua di kalangan para sahabat dan semua yang mengenali Allahyarham.

Bagi pihak Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor, saya merakamkan ucapan takziah kepada keluarga Allahyarham Tuan Mohd Fairuz bin Mahmood. Akhir sekali, saya memohon supaya nota prosiding ini disimpan di dalam arkib Mahkamah Tinggi dan satu salinan diserah kepada waris Allahyarham.

Terima kasih.

HAJAH NORFAIZAH BINTI HJ. ZAINUDDIN MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Pada hari ini, kita sama-sama berkumpul untuk menghormati dan memperingati Allahyarham dan Mendiang ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia yang telah meninggalkan kita buat selama-lamanya.

Sehubungan itu, saya hadir prosiding pagi ini bagi pihak YBhg. Tan Sri Peguam Negara Malaysia. Saya diwakilkan untuk menyampaikan rasa dukacita beliau atas ketidakhadiran beliau pada istiadat hari ini atas desakan tugas rasmi. Saya juga hadir bagi pihak kesemua pegawai Perkhidmatan Kehakiman dan Perundangan bagi melahirkan perasaan sedih kami di atas pemergian Allahyarham dan mendiang ahliahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia ini serta menyampaikan ucapan salam takziah kami kepada keluarga mereka.

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

SPEECH BY PUAN ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF IN HER TRIBUTE TO THE DEPARTED MEMBERS

should be an opportunity for us to commemorate and honour the lives and memories of these 4 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.

ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF

Pengarah Guaman Negeri Johor

CLOSING SPEECH BY MR. R JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR

My Lord, the Johore Bar shares the sentiments expressed by my learned friends. The departed members will be missed, their comradeship and contribution at the Bar will be remembered. May I have your Lordship’s permission to add a few words on behalf of the Johore Bar about the departed members.

The late Mr P. Suppiah and Mr John Ang were amongst the most senior members of the Malaysian Bar with each having been at the Bar for more than 50 years.

Mr Suppiah also served as the Chairman of the Johore Bar. Apart from his standing as well known counsel, he was certainly a colourful character who had added much discussions at the Bar with his ideas and actions. He was also known for his insistence on rules and regulations, his lasting contribution to the Bar would perhaps be the rules that he had written to govern the meetings and proceedings of the Bar Council and General Meetings of the Malaysian Bar –also at times referred to as the Suppiah Rules

Mr John Ang – was also a contemporary of Mr Suppiah. He was perhaps what one may describe as the quintessential old school gentleman of the Bar. I have had the pleasure of being close with him during my employment for about 15 years in his firm. He was a very gentle, kind hearted man – hardly lost his temper nor raised his voice. He enjoyed being in the profession, always aspired to comply with the highest standard of the Bar and was a stickler for the values of the Bar. It was indeed a privilege to have been his colleague.

My Lord, I do not have the privilege of knowing Datuk Freddie Loong personally. Nevertheless, he was a well known figure at the Johore Bar, a senior member who was very supportive of the Bar. He was active in community works, and had often spoken out on community and social issues in Johor Bahru. Whilst the earlier gentlemen have had the benefit of living almost a full life, Mohd Fairuz was unfortunately lost too young and too soon. I have known Fairuz since our school days in Sekolah Sultan Ismail Johor Bahru. He was very smart and was one of the top students in the STPM examination and went on to read law at the University Malaya. We did our pupillage together in Johor Bahru. He was shortly in practice before he went on to join the civil service. When he was serving as Magistrate and Deputy Registrar including in Johor Bahru, he was known as a helpful judicial officer. He returned to the Bar after some time and enjoyed his practice. Regrettably, over time, his health gave way and eventually his passing at a young age.

My Lords, the departed members were good colleagues at the Bar and will be missed. The Johore Bar is proud to acknowledge them as one of our own. To the families of the departed members, the Johore Bar shares the pain of your loss. Our words would perhaps be of little consolation but you will leave today with the pride knowing that your loved ones not only lived a good life at the Bar but will also be cherished by their professional colleagues. May their soul rest in peace.

With that, the Johore Bar supports the motion from my learned friends respectively, for the records of this proceedings to be kept and preserved in the archives of this Honorable Court, and that a copy thereof be extended to the bereaved families. Much obliged, My Lord.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

Johore

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HONOURABLE JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER, TUAN AHMAD MURAD BIN ABDUL AZIZ ON SUNDAY, 29TH MAY 2022 AT THE JOHOR BAHRU HIGH COURT

INTRODUCTORY SPEECH BY MR. R JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR

Dengan izin Yang Arif, saya R. Jayabalan hadir mewakili Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor dan bagi pihak Majlis Peguam, Bar Malaysia. Rakan bijaksana saya Pn Zahilah Mohammad Yusoff, Pengarah Guaman Johor hadir mewakili Jabatan Peguam Negara. Saya memohon kebenaran untuk meneruskan dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lord, we are gathered today to pay our respect to four departed members of the Johore Bar - the late Mr Reginald Vallipuram, Mr Yap Siong Cheng, Mr Mar Sze Wei, and Mr Ganeson Gunathan.

My learned friends Mr S Jeyakumar, Ms Tay Bee Choo, Mr Dominic Steeven and Puan Nurul are also appearing to deliver the tribute to the four members respectively. May I also put on record the presence of members of the Bar, relatives and friends of the departed members at the gallery to witness the proceedings.

My Lord, on behalf of the Johore Bar Committee I would like to express our appreciation to Your Lordship for allowing our request for the reference proceedings today.

Reference proceedings is a unique tradition of the Bar. This is when the stakeholders of the administration of justice – the Bar, Bench and the AGC come together upon the death of a member. We recall the memories of the departed member and bid our farewell as colleagues.

The significance of reference proceedings was summarized by learned counsel Datuk Dr Cyrus Das at the reference held for the late Dato’ Ronald Khoo before His Lordship Tan Sri Dato’ Edgar Joseph Jr on 24.4.1998. This is what he said

“The practice of references for deceased judges and lawyers served to remind us that we belong to one body with one objective, namely, the pursuit of justice through the legal process. In that collective effort, governed by the unwritten rules of etiquette and tradition which are just as important as the written ones, the death of one of us diminishes the whole, and so we gather to mourn the loss, to pay tribute and remind ourselves that the journey must be made and the faith must be kept”.

We are here today for that very purpose. With that My Lord, my learned friends will now begin with their respective tribute.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

His Lordship, Yang Arif Tuan Ahmad Murad bin Abdul Aziz.

Puan Zahilah Binti Mohammad Yusoff, Senior Federal Counsel, representing the Attorney General Chambers.

Mr. R Jayabalan, the Chairman of the Johore Bar and on behalf of the Bar Council.

May it please you My Lord,

Our late Yap Siong Cheng is known to all and sundry as simply “Yap”.

Born to an illustrious family, Yap was the youngest son of the late Yap Siew Cheng. And Yap Siew Cheng was Johor Bahru’s visionary and astute son who pioneered the development of one of the Johor Bahru’s first housing estate, Century Gardens, way back in the 1960s.

Yap was a Saint Joseph boy who went on to City of London Polytechnic (currently known as London Metropolitan University) for his Higher National Diploma in Business Studies before pursuing his degree in Business Law at the same university. A member of Lincoln’s Inn, he was called to the English Bar in July 1983 and the Malaysian Bar in November 1984.

I have known Yap for a good 46 years. He had been in practice for a good 36 years. From pupilage to the end of his days, Yap was synonymous with the firm Messrs. Arthur Lee and Company. Stoic in principles and dogged in pursuits, as you shall see.

During his 36 years of practice, he was known not just by his peers but also the younger practitioners,

as a litigator who’s both a gentleman and a scholar. During his days at the Bar, he served as a member of the Johor Bar Committee for a notable number of years and remained member of the Disciplinary tribunal till the end of his days. He saw through the evolvement of the Malaysian legal practice; from the abolishment of all Privy Council appeals in 1985; to the defence of judiciary crisis in 1988; to the abolishment of jury trials in 1995, and many more. Certainly a most eventful practice, to say the least.

On the personal front, the very mention of his name conjures a “lepak” character who loves his music, his cigarettes, his sarongs, his coffees and when the sun sets, his whiskies and wines with his spouse and “kakis” from all walks of life.

Yap was a staunch believer of engaging and giving back to the community. He was an active Rotarian and served as president of the Rotary Club, Tebrau Chapter from 1994 to 1995 and 2013 to 2014. As president, he catalysed the establishment of the Rotary Club of Tebrau Heart Fund and later, the Heart Fund Foundation which assisted in arranging and financing treatment of children with congenital heart problems. Some of these children were sent as far as to India for treatment and surgery. Many of them now live good normal lives because of his efforts.

Amongst his other give backs, was the revival of the Rukun Tetangga in Century Gardens in 1999 (and for the younger ones who had never heard of it, it’s a Neighbourhood watch), when crimes were on the rise. During these times too, he spearheaded and registered the Johor Society for the Performing Arts (fondly referred to as JSPA) in the year 2000. He missed the London theatre and art scene and felt a great need to kindle and infuse some aesthetics to good ole Johor Bahru. As the President of JSPA from inception, Yap launched unfailingly into putting the Johor annual arts festival on the Johoreans’ social calendar for more than a decade. All these he achieved with the loving and wholehearted support and devotion of his late wife, the indomitable Mrs. Suzie Chin Yap.

When Yap was diagnosed with leukemia in 2019, he acted immediately to treat this dreadful thief of life. For the next 2 years or so, with his 2 sons, Nicky and Sean, and his daughter, Chloe constantly by his side, he fought hard to stay. Countless rounds

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE YAP SIONG CHENG BY MS. TAY BEE CHOO

of chemotherapy and subsequently even a bone marrow transplant couldn’t stave off this relentless enemy. On 20.03.2021, he left peacefully in the quiet of the night.

My Lord, Yap was only 63 years young. Gone too soon, and dearly missed. We at Arthur Lee & Company had lost a notable partner and chief litigator. May he rest in peace.

Thank you.

TAY BEE CHOO MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE MAR SZE WEI

BY PN. NURUL SAFWATY BINTI SALLEH

Adnan Sundra & Low as a qualified lawyer with their litigation department in September 2005. The Late Christopher Mar Sze Wei subsequently joined 2 reputable law firms before venturing on his own as a co-founder of Messrs Munhoe & Mar in May 2013. He joined Messrs Woon Wee Yuen & Partners as a partner in August 2020.

The Late Christopher Mar Sze Wei is also a qualified adjudicator with the Asian International Arbitration Centre, a qualified mediator with the Malaysian Mediation Centre and an evaluative mediator with the Royal Institution for Chartered Surveyors.

Outside his busy practice, the late Christopher Mar Sze Wei dedicated his time to his alma mater, actively participating and volunteering his time with the Foon Yew Alumnus and taking up classes on minor study subject at his alma mater to share his knowledge and experience in the legal field with Foon Yew’s high school students.

The Late Christopher Mar Sze Wei left behind his mother and 2 sisters. His sister, Mar Sze Ling, and a few of his close friends are with us today for these proceedings. Members of Johore Bar offer their heartfelt and sincere condolences to the family and, friends of the late Christopher Mar Sze Wei.

Yang Arif, we gather here to remember the late Christopher Mar Sze Wei an esteem member of Johore Bar who passed away on 7 Mei, 2021 at an early age of 40.

The Late Christopher Mar Sze Wei was born on 20 February 1981 and was called to the Malaysian Bar in 2005.

The late Christopher Mar Sze Wei was an honest and trustworthy lawyer to the core. His early education was with Foon Yew High School from 1994 to 1999.

He later graduated from Northumbria University with a Bachelor of Laws(LLB) in 2003. He went on to read in, the chambers of Messrs Karpal Singh & Co from December 2004 to August 2005. He joined Messrs

Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

In conclusion, I offer my deepest condolences to the family of the late Christopher Mar Sze Wei. I also humbly move that a record of these proceedings be preserved in the archives of this Court, and a copy thereof sent to the family.

Farewell my friend Greet the Lord for me Being your friend Has been an honour

NURUL SAFWATY BINTI SALLEH MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE TO THE LATE REGINALD VALLIPURAM BY

MR. S JEYAKUMAR

and Mrs Chelliah Vallipuram and hailed from a large family in Klang, Selangor. He was in the teaching profession before deciding to pursue his law degree at the University of Singapore where he graduated in 1966 with an LLB Honours Degree.

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Saya, S. Jeyakumar hadir untuk memberi ucapan dan memberi penghormatan kepada mendiang Reginald Vallipuram.

Rakan bijaksana saya Encik R. Jayabalan mewakili Jawatan Kuasa Peguam Negeri Johor dan Majlis Peguam Malaysia.

Rakan bijaksana saya Puan Zahilah Binti Mohammad Yusoff mewakili Yang Berbahagia Peguam Negara Malaysia.

Yang Arif, saya memohon kebenaran Mahkamah yang Mulia ini untuk meneruskan ucapan saya dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lord, The legal profession is an honourable one and has the singular distinction of being the only profession that welcomes newly qualified members with a ceremonial Call to the Bar and pays tribute and remembers them when they depart by way of a Reference. The significance of this sitting was aptly stated by former Malaysian Bar President, Dato’ Dr Cyrus Das whom I quote:

“The practice of references for deceased Judges and lawyers served to remind us that we belong to one body with one objective, namely the pursuit of justice through the legal process.

In that collective effort, governed by unwritten rules of etiquette and tradition which are just as important as the written ones, the death of one of us diminishes the whole, and so we gather to mourn the loss, to pay tribute and remind ourselves that the journey must be made and the faith must be kept”

Mr Reginald Vallipuram was born on 25/8/1942 to Mr

He was called to the High Court of Singapore at the end of 1966 and thereafter called to the High Court of Malays on 29th January 1969. Reginald commenced practice in Johor Bahru and worked as a Legal Assistant at Messrs Goh Bin Lay & Co. On 15th September 1973, he opened his own firm known as Reginald Vallipuram & Co and carried on under that name and style until his demise on 15th June 2021 spanning a period of about 48 years of uninterrupted practice as a very successful sole proprietor.

Many lawyers have immensely benefited under his guidance as he honed his civil litigation practice and brought it to commendable heights, being empanelled with large institutions and companies and the law journals being replete with his firm’s cases in areas ranging from injunctions to Company matters and from land disputes to hire purchase matters.

Apart from his busy practice, he also served as Chairman of the Panel of the Investigating Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings and served as a Notary Public.

He was a firm taskmaster in the office but at the same time was a fatherly and caring figure who always placed the best interests of his staff and lawyers at heart. It is no coincidence that he built a team of extremely loyal staff who remained with him between 25 to 40 years and these very hard working and efficient staff such as Miss Teo, Miss Chan, Cik Ainon, Miss Tay, Miss Anne and Cik Monita helped build his formidable practice.

Over and above all Reginald was totally devoted to his family. A lifelong bachelor, Reginald channeled all his devotion, love and care to his parents, siblings and their children. After the passing of his beloved mother, Reginald went to extraordinary lengths to take care of his family. He encouraged his late younger brother Roy to study law and financed his studies until Roy was called to the Bar in 1993. When his sister Elizabeth was battling cancer he took care of her and her medical bills. Similarly he also took care of his late sister Emily and was a surrogate parent to

his brother Richard. He is also left behind by another brother Lionel and sister Margaret in Singapore.

Over and above his lifelong commitment to his legal practice and family, Reginald was a man of faith who was devoted to Church. He was very active at the St Christopher’s Church in Johor Bahru where he served as the Vicar’s Warden for many years. He was also the Chairman of the Building Committee of his church and successfully managed the project to build a multipurpose hall within the Church premises. He was a rare diamond in that he was a very magnanimous person.

He always worked behind the scenes to get things done but never sought the limelight. He always tended for and lavished on his loved ones but was always frugal for himself.

His happiness was in watching others being happy. He would often provide breakfast for the congregation after Friday Church service. He often provided financial assistance to those in need without ever making a public show of it. A private man to the end, he never divulged his medical condition so as to not elicit sympathy. His visits to the hospital were done in private.

During the course of his practice, Reginald built up an impressive law library encompassing the English Law Reports, Singapore Law Reports, Malaysian Law Reports, various annotated statutes, Court Forms and law books. Upon his demise, his family has graciously donated his entire library to the Johore Bar Committee for which all Johor lawyers are grateful for this invaluable bequest so that current and future generations of lawyers stand to benefit in the furtherance of their practice. From reliable sources, it has been said that Reginald’s favorite Bible passage is Psalm 23 and it is opportune at this juncture to refer to the first and last paragraphs therein which read:-

“The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever”.

All through his life, Reginald never craved for wants and material comforts but always gave to others freely with love and care. He is now dwelling contentedly

above in the Father’s House. Rest in Heavenly Peace, Mr Reginald.

My Lord, Reginald belongs to the old school of lawyers who undertook the practice of law with the highest professional standards and his passing has left a deep void in the Johor Bar.

May his contributions to the Johor Bar and to the legal profession always be remembered and his devotion and commitment to his loved ones always be cherished.

My Lord, I respectfully pray that the record of these proceedings be preserved for posterity in the archives of this Honorable Court and a copy thereof be extended to his family.

Much obliged My Lord.

S JEYAKUMAR MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR TRIBUTE FOR THE LATE GANESON A/L GUNATHAN BY MR. DOMINIC STEEVAN

May it please you My Lord, The Chairman of the Johore Bar, Mr R. Jayabalan, The Representative of the Attorney-General Chambers, Puan Zahilah binti Mohammad Yusoff.

We are gathered here this morning to pay tribute to the memory of the late Mr Ganeson, popularly known as Ganeson within the legal fraternity. Mr. Ganeson was the Principal Partner of the esteemed Messrs. Ganeson Gomathy Fazlin M.Nava & Co. Mr. Ganeson was everything across the board to me and

for me. He was Boss, Mentor, Partner and a Brother. But more on that later.

Mr Ganeson was born on the 12th of March 1987 in Ipoh. His late father Gunathan was a barber who owned a Barbershop named Kedai Gunting Ganeson His mother Mdm Thanalectchumy was a housewife. Together they had 4 children and Mr Ganeson was their first.

Mr Ganeson’s early education began in earnest at Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan (Tamil) Pengkalan Baru. He then continued his secondary education at Sekolah Menegah Kebangsaan Dato’ Idris, Pengkalan Baru and finally he completed his Form 6 at Sekolah Menegah Kebangsaan Raja Shahriman, at Beruas.

He obtained a Bachelor of Laws (LLB (Hons)) degree from the Multimedia University of Malaysia in the year 2011 and was thereafter admitted as an Advocate & Solicitor in the High Court of Malaya on 10 September 2012. He was employed as an LA at Messrs. M Manoharan & Co.

With sufficient experience he was able to practice in various areas of law. This then coerced him to enter into a Partnership with Ms Gomathy Balasupramaniam to set up Messrs. Ganeson Gomathy & Partners in year 2013.

Since 2012 Mr Ganeson has been involved in various matters like Contracts, Defamation, Land Disputes, Derivative Actions, Civil Fraud Cases, Criminal Matters and Personal Injury Matters.

Besides being a fearless Lawyer, Mr Ganeson saw the necessity to serve the community. The life of a human being is incomplete if that life fails to be of service to the human society. These were the words of Mr Ganeson. He gave many motivational speeches to students at his primary school and also supported them financially. He always encouraged them to excel in life. He believed in sharing his thoughts and experiences with these young minds.

Mr Ganeson was a fervent believer of his religion. I would know as I would be on the receiving end of the many video clips and the pictures he shared via WhatsApp and Facebook.

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

During the course of my employment, I found something extraordinary about the personality of this man. He was strict but nevertheless kind and compassionate. I vividly remember how the late Mr Ganeson guided me during my chambering, and later he offered a partnership to me at his firm and made me who I am today.

While the late Mr Ganeson was very driven to succeed, he never lost sight of other people’s need for success and recognition. He made it a point to nurture others.

He was quite often unassuming, humble and I must confess a very witty man full of humour. Those who know him will attest to this.

I have the greatest admiration and respect for this man. His capabilities, tenacity, energy and public relations skills with clients were beyond one’s imagination. The fire and desire within the late Mr Ganeson probably explains and justifies how his firm was able to grow up.

Mr Ganeson’s untimely demise is personally a big loss to me. I know the other lawyers and staff of our firm miss him as well. He undoubtedly leaves a deep void in the lives of his family and friends. I not only lost a brother but a master and a very compatible, trustworthy and capable partner. The lawyers and staffs of the firm are committed to keeping the legacy of their managing partner alive and strive to ensure that the firm of Ganeson Gomathy Fadzlin M Nava & Co continues to grow from strength to strength.

The late Mr Ganeson leaves behind his widow Gomathy Balasupramaniam, his loving mother, brothers and sisters, and other relatives and friends including members of his firm to mourn his loss. All of us present here today and those who were not able be in attendance will always cherish his memory.

I leave you with these words which were so often uttered to me by my brother, Mr. Ganeson: “No matter what, WE will grow together. WE are equals.”

And that my dear friends is what Mr. Ganeson was. The embodiment of humility. Thank you.

STEEVAN MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

DOMINIC

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Pada hari ini, kita sama-sama berkumpul untuk menghormati dan memperingati Mendiang ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia yang telah meninggalkan kita buat selama-lamanya.

Sehubungan itu, saya hadir prosiding pagi ini bagi pihak YBhg. Tan Sri Peguam Negara Malaysia. Saya diwakilkan untuk menyampaikan rasa dukacita beliau atas ketidakhadiran beliau pada istiadat hari ini atas desakan tugas rasmi. Saya juga hadir bagi pihak kesemua pegawai Perkhidmatan Kehakiman dan Perundangan bagi melahirkan perasaan sedih kami di atas pemergian Mendiang ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia ini serta menyampaikan ucapan salam takziah kami kepada keluarga mereka.

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 4 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, When one passes on to another world, we will always remember the different things in different ways by each different people. We would remember the talents that they have, the achievements that they have grasped, the virtues that they have portrayed and the ideals that we admire of. And here we are, where we reminisce and acknowledge our beloved colleagues who have shifted to another point after life.

Yang Arif, On behalf of the Honourable Attorney-General and all the members of the Judicial and Legal Service, we want to express our most heartfelt condolences

to the families, relatives of our colleagues that are honoured today and may their soul rest in peace.

Yang Arif, Akhir kata, saya ingin mengusulkan supaya Rekod Prosiding ini disimpan di dalam Arkib Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini dan sesalinan rekod diserahkan kepada setiap ahli keluarga Mendiang yang telah meninggalkan kita dengan pelbagai kenangan dan adalah diharapkan hari ini akan diingati sampai bilabila.

Sekian, terima kasih.

ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF PENGARAH GUAMAN NEGERI JOHOR

CLOSING SPEECH BY MR. R

JAYABALAN

CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR

My Lord, the Johore Bar shares the sentiments expressed by my learned friends about the departed members. They will indeed be missed and their comradeship and contribution at the Bar will be remembered.

May I have your Lordship’s permission to add a few words on behalf of the Johore Bar about the departed members.

Mr Reginald Vallipuram was one of the most senior member of the Johore Bar with more than 50 years in practice. He led an exemplary life and practice at the Bar. He loved the law, enjoyed handling a wide variety of cases and had thirst for the law. He invested well in books and his library was one of the best in town – and he was always kind enough to share his books with members of the Bar.

He was highly regarded and a well respected member of the Bar. In turn, despite his stature, he was also respectful and courteous to all. He was well known for his diligence, hard work and resourcefulness when it comes to work. Perhaps it would be apt to say that he was one of those lawyers who were working all the time

SPEECH BY PN. ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF IN HER TRIBUTE TO THE DEPARTED MEMBERS

Mr Reginald was very helpful to fellow members and would gladly share his thoughts on any legal issues. It was quite common for members to call him for advice on legal issues. He would gladly oblige and in fact often, would also do the research and came back with the answer and authorities.

The late Mr Reginald had a strong sense of fairness and ethics. He was always very courteous towards his opponent and earned the respect of the court whenever he makes his appearance. He was a strong supporter of the Bar. He supported the activities of the Bar and was generous whenever contributions were sought for the Bar.

Mr Yap Siong Cheng was a senior member of the Johore Bar as well having been in practice for more than 30 years. He had also contributed his time to serve at the Bar Committee for several years. The Bar had certainly benefited from his contribution. He was a well known litigator in town and was highly regarded.

Mr Yap was also well known for his active involvement in the performing arts scene. He actively encouraged Johore lawyers to take up arts either by participation or attending the events. Perhaps it is fair to say, that through him, the Johore lawyers were brought closer to the performing arts scene in the country. That’s not necessarily a bad thing considering that lawyers are constantly under stress and he showed us a way to de-stress and to take work slightly easier.

The late Ganeson Gunathan and Mar Sze Wei were unfortunately too young and had gone too soon. Their practice was still in the growing stage when tragedy struck. Ganeson was about 10 years in practice and had just set up a branch in Johor Bahru when he passed away. Sze Wei was about 16 years in practice and a popular person amongst the younger lawyers. I do not have the benefit of knowing the two of them personally but from what has been said by my learned friends and what I have heard in conversations with their friends, both were passionate about legal practice, determined to do well in life and professionally and had been a source of inspiration to others. I associate myself with all the sentiments expressed by my learned friends about this two gentlemen.

My Lords, the departed members were good colleagues at the Bar and will be dearly missed. The Johore Bar is proud to acknowledge them as one of our own. The Johore Bar shares the pain of the families in their bereavement. To the families, our words would perhaps be of little consolation as compared to your loss but you will leave today with the pride knowing that your loved ones not only lived a good life at the Bar but they will also be cherished by their professional colleagues. May their soul rest in peace.

With that, My Lord, the Johore Bar supports the motion from my learned friends respectively, for the records of this proceedings to be kept and preserved in the archives of this Honorable Court, and that a copy thereof be extended to the bereaved families. Much obliged, My Lord.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DATUK

ASLAM BIN ZAINUDDIN ON TUESDAY, 31ST MAY 2022 AT THE JOHOR BAHRU HIGH COURT

INTRODUCTORY SPEECH

BY MR. R JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE

Dengan izin Yang Arif, saya R. Jayabalan hadir mewakili Jawatankuasa Peguam Negeri Johor dan Majlis Peguam, Bar Malaysia. Rakan bijaksana saya Pn Zahilah Mohammad Yusoff, Pengarah Guaman Johor hadir mewakili Jabatan Peguam Negara. Saya memohon kebenaran untuk meneruskan dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

My Lord, we are here today to celebrate the life and memories of four of our departed members of the Bar and to pay our respect. They are the late Azmi bin Ahmad Bakri, Arwa binti Hj Abdul Rahman, Dato Teo Say Koon and Haji Noordin bin Hussin.

My learned friends Hj Rosli Kamarudin, Pn Munirah Najihah, Mr Gan Techiong and En Rasheed are appearing to deliver their respective tribute to the departed members. We also have the presence of members of the Bar, relatives and friends of the departed members at the gallery to witness the proceedings. May I put on record their presence as well.

May I also express the Johore Bar’s appreciation to Your Lordship for allowing the Johore Bar’s request to hold this reference proceedings and also for presiding the proceedings today.

My Lord, reference proceedings for deceased member is an ancient practice of the Bar. Whilst we welcome new entrants into the legal profession in the presence of the Bar, the Bench and the AGC by way of Long Call proceedings, when these members leave us permanently, the Bar, Bench and the AGC once again come together to recall the departed member’s life at the Bar and we bid our final farewell as professional colleagues. It is the efforts like this by the Bar and the Bench that is keeping the traditions of the Bar alive and adds prestige to the legal profession itself.

BAR

The significance of reference proceedings was aptly put by the former President of the Malaysian Bar Datuk Dr Cyrus Das at the reference proceedings held for the eminent counsel, the late Dato’ Ronald Khoo before the Federal Court Judge His Lordship Edgar Joseph Jr on 24.4.1998. This is what the learned counsel said:

“The practice of references for deceased judges and lawyers served to remind us that we belong to one body with one objective, namely, the pursuit of justice through the legal process. In that collective effort, governed by the unwritten rules of etiquette and tradition which are just as important as the written ones, the death of one of us diminishes the whole, and so we gather to mourn the loss, to pay tribute and remind ourselves that - the journey must be made and the faith must be kept”.

That is our objective as well today My Lord. My learned friends will now begin with their respective tribute to the departed members. Thank You My Lord.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE FOR THE LATE AZMI BIN AHMAD BAKRI

BY EN. HJ. ROSLI BIN KAMARUDDIN

Keputusan dan prinsip kes ini menjadi duluan kepada tuntutan-tuntutan lain penduduk Taman Saujana dan Allahyarham telah membantu untuk memberi kesedaran kepada para litigan iaitu membiasakan diri dengan cara tindakan yang betul menurut undangundang dan menghargai menghormati nasihat perundangan yang diberikan.

Allahyarham juga diingati sebagai “warrior” dalam pasukan bola sepak mewakili Johore Bar dan semangat juang yang tinggi dan tidak mengalah dengan cabaran lawan menjadikan Allahyarham diberi nama jolokan ‘Taro’ dikalangan rakan dan taulan.

Allahyarham Azmi bin Ahmad Bakri telah dilahirkan pada 27hb Ogos, 1979 di Kampung Changkat Rambai, Kg. Gajah, Perak dan telah mendapat pendidikan sekolah menengah di SM Dato Maharajalela dan MRSM Balik Pulau.

Allahyarham telah diterima belajar di Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) dalam jurusan Undangundang pada tahun 1997 dan telah menamatkan pengajian dengan jayanya pada tahun 2002.

Allahyarham Azmi adalah sahabat dan Peguam di pejabat Rosli Kamaruddin & Co (RK&Co). Beliau juga antara sahabat karib keluarga saya sendiri. Dua kali berkhidmat dengan firma RK & Co iaitu pada sekitar tahun 2005 hingga 2007 dan kembali semula ke firma RK & Co pada tahun 2017 hingga 2019.

Beliau amat menghormati saya secara peribadi dan pada beliau saya adalah mentor dan ‘abang’ di dalam kerjayanya. Beliau seorang yang amat patuh dan menghormati segala nasihat yang diberikan.

Beliau membantu firma RK&Co di dalam banyak kejayaan kami di dalam memberi perkhidmatan perundangan. Antara yang paling terserlah ialah membantu firma mengendalikan isu-isu perundangan tertangguh lebih 50 tahun bagi prosiding tuntutan penduduk-penduduk Taman Saujana, Plentong, Johor. Antara kes yang mendapat sentuhan dan sumbangan khidmat Allahyarham adalah Noraini Binti Mohamed Hadi Lwn Pembangunan Tanah Dan Perumahan Sendirian Berhad, Guaman Sivil No: JA23NCvC-35-12/2016 dan JA-23NCvC-36-12/2016. Kes ini berakhir di Mahkamah Rayuan dan saya menyambung kes ini di peringkat rayuan dan Ketua Panel Rayuan pada masa ini Allahyarham Datuk Ahmadi Hj Asnawi juga telah kembali ke Rahmatullah.

Allahyarham berkongsi rahsia kerjaya dan adakalanya rahsia peribadi kepada saya yang dianggap sebagai ‘abang’. Pada sekitar tahun 2017 apabila beliau ingin kembali bertugas di firma RK&Co, beliau menyatakan kepada saya beliau ingin cuba lakukan sesuatu yang berbeza dalam hidupnya. Beliau berlatih sebagai penyelam (diver) di Pulau Tioman dan beliau merasa kedamaian apabila melakukan aktiviti selaman. Namun kecintaan dan kerinduan kepada profesion guaman membuatkan beliau membuat ‘comeback’ ke dalam profesion ini.

Dalam pada semangat juang yang tinggi dalam sukan dan karier kepeguaman, sebenarnya Allahyarham adalah seorang yang sentimental. Beliau pernah menitiskan air mata apabila terlalu gembira mendapat cahaya mata yang diberi nama Adam Harith B Azmi. Suka duka banyak dikongsi bersama saya dan keluarga saya serta rakan-rakan rapat Allahyarham oleh sebab kedua ibu bapa beliau telah meninggal dunia semasa beliau di zaman universiti.

Tuhan lebih menyayangi beliau dan pada tanggal 19/08/2021 beliau telah meninggalkan kita semua. Satu lagi permata yang sedang bersinar telah tiada. Ahli keluarga terutama Adam Harith, saya, keluarga saya, warga RK&Co, rakan-rakan universiti, rakanrakan peguam merasa kehilangan yang besar.

Kami sentiasa merinduinya dan kami mendoakan agar Allahyarham damai di sana.

Akhir sekali, saya memohon supaya nota prosiding ini disimpan di dalam arkib Mahkamah Tinggi dan satu salinan diserah kepada waris Allahyarham.

ROSLI KAMARUDDIN MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

TRIBUTE FOR THE LATE ARWA BINTI HJ. ABDUL RAHMAN

BY PN. MUNIRAH NAJIHAH BINTI SHAARI

Antarabangsa Malaysia. Disini bermula permulaan Langkah beliau di dalam bidang perundangan. Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman telah mendapat dikurniakan ijazah Undang-Undang dengan kepujian di Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia dan kemudiannya telah menjalani Latihan dalam kamar sehingga diterima masuk dan didaftarkan sebagai Peguambela & Peguamcara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya pada 30 Jun 2006.

Di awal kerjayanya, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman memulakan kerjayanya sebagai pegawai penasihat undang-undang di syarikat MSET Holdings Sdn Bhd selama 6 tahun dan kemudiannya di MTU Services (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd selama hampir 2 tahun.

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Saya Munirah Najihah Binti Shaari dari Tetuan Munirah Najihah & Co memohon izin untuk membacakan pengucapan penghormatan di dalam prosiding rujukan pada hari ini ke atas Allahyarhamah Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman dari Tetuan Arwa & Associates yang telah Kembali ke rahmatullah pada 9 September 2021 bersamaan dengan 2 safar 1443 hijrah.

Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman umpama sebutir berlian yang berharga Kepada pemiliknya iaitu keluarganya dan sentiasa bersinar menyinari orang-orang di sekelilingnya. Hilangnya tiada ganti, pemergiannya akan sentiasa dirindui. Izinkan saya memberikan sedikit pengenalan latarbelakang Kepada insan istimewa ini.

Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman dilahirkan pada 5 Oktober 1980 di Ketereh Kelantan. Merupakan anak ke 4 dari 8 orang adik beradik. Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman dibesarkan dan dididik dengan menjadikan Islam sebagai panduan hidup. Ayahnya Abdul Rahman Bin Lateh dan ibunya iaitu Wan Kalsom menetap di Yala Thailand kerana bapanya menguruskan masjid dan madrasah yang diwarisi daripada keluarganya di Yala Thailand. Oleh yang demikian, sejak dari kecil beliau telah diajar berdikari dan pandai membawa diri. Beliau banyak menghabiskan masa tinggal dengan ibu dan bapa saudaranya kerana bersekolah di Ketereh Kelantan.

Hasil keputusan yang cemerlang di dalam peperiksaan SPM, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman telah ditawarkan untuk melanjutkan pelajaran di Universiti Islam

Seterusnya pada tahun 2015, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman telah menubuhkan firmanya sendiri di atas nama Arwa & Associates. Sepanjang beramal sebagai Peguambela & Peguamcara, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman banyak mengendalikan kes-kes litigasi jenayah dan sivil. Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman menjadikan profession beliau sebagai peguam bukan sekadar kerjaya biasa namun sebagai Amanah dan medium untuk turut membantu masyarakat. Oleh yang demikian, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman juga aktif sebagai peguam Yayasan Bantuan Guaman sejak dari 2015. Pada tahun 2017, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman berpindah ke Johor Bahru dan meneruskan firma beliau di Johor Bahru. Beliau seorang yang ikhlas di dalam Amanah yang diberi, rajin menimba ilmu dan membaca, berdedikasi, jujur dan komited di dalam tugasannya. Banyak kes-kes yang dikendalikan beliau turut dilaporkan di dalam CLJ dan Lexis Nexis. Beliau juga amat dikenali dikalangan peguam dan kakitangan mahkamah sebagai seorang yang mudah didekati, tidak lokek ilmu, dan sentiasa merendah diri. Dari kalangan anakguam yang pernah berurusan dengan beliau, Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman dikenali sebagai seorang peguam yang dipercayai kebolehannya, professional dan baik hati.

Dari sisi kerjayanya, beliau sememangnya seorang peguam yang boleh dicontohi. Dari sisi lain, beliau adalah seorang anak yang membanggakan Kepada orang tuanya, seorang isteri yang solehah dan baik, dan seorang ibu yang penyayang.

Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman mendirikan rumahtangganya dengan Md Faisal Bin M Yusuf pada tahun 2013. Suaminya mengatakan Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman ini

adalah seorang isteri yang sangat baik dan sempurna. Beliau sentiasa tenang di dalam apa jua situasi, dan sentiasa meletakkan keluarga sebagai keutamaannya. Hasil perkongsian hidup, beliau dikurniakan cahayamata Bernama Ahmad Fadhlurrahman yang kini berumur 7 tahun. Menariknya tentang insan Bernama Arwa ini, beliau juga turut menjaga 4 lagi orang anak tirinya dan memberi kasih sayang Kepada semua anak-anak secara sama rata dan dengan penuh ikhlas. Farah nabihah kini berumur 18 tahun merupakan lepasan SPM di Maahad Assobirin Ayer Lanas Kelantan. Keduanya Ahmad Zaim kini berumur 16 tahun dan bersekolah di MRSM Jeli Kelantan. Ketiga, Farah Nazihah berumur 14 tahun yang turut bersekolah di MRSM Jeli Kelantan. Anak ini dikatakan sangat mengagumi ibunya dan turut menyatakan Hasrat untuk menjadi peguam sama seperti ibunya. Seterusnya Farah Raihana yang kini berumur 12 tahun yang bersekoleh di SK Penduk Jeli Kelantan.

Saya bukanlah antara yang paling lama mengenali insan istimewa ini. Dan juga mungkin bukan yang paling rapat dengannya. Saya mula mengenali beliau pada tahun 2017 dan terlalu banyak kebaikan beliau Kepada saya bukan sahaja sebagai rakan peguam, namun juga sebagai seorang kakak Kepada saya. Beliau banyak membantu saya, dan juga selalu memberikan nasihat dan kata-kata semangat Kepada saya. Beliau akan terus dikenangi dengan segala kebaikannya, sikap pemurahnya dan senyumannya. Saya juga sangat berbesar hati apabila diberi peluang bercakap tentan insan ini. Saya sentiasa merindukan senyumannya dan selorohnya, Kali terakhr saya berjumpa dan melihat wajah insan ini adalah Ketika saya membuat pengecaman jenazah. Subhanallah, segalanya sempurna dan tenang. Itulah wajah yang selamanya akan saya rindui.

Semoga roh Arwa Binti Abdul Rahman ditempatkan dikalangan orang-orang yang beriman dan para solehin dan semoga Allah memudahkan urusannya dan keluarga yang ditinggalkan. Alfatihah.

Akhir sekali, saya memohon supaya nota prosiding ini disimpan di dalam arkib Mahkamah Tinggi dan satu salinan diserah kepada waris Allahyarhamah.

NAJIHAH BINTI SHAARI MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

My Lord, Please allow me to begin by conveying the appreciation of the family of the late Dato’ Teo Say Koon to this honourable court and the Johor Bar Committee for holding this Reference Proceedings to remember him. It is especially meaningful for the family because the late Dato’ Teo passed away in September last year, at a time when it was impossible to hold an open Wake for friends and relatives to pay their last respect before his funeral.

The late Dato’ Teo was born on 6th September 1956 in Segamat. His late father, Mr.Teo Lip was the headmaster of a Chinese primary school. Dato’ Teo was the second youngest among his siblings, No.9 to be precise. Speaking of his siblings, his elder brother Dato’ Teo Say Eng, who is present in this honourable court today, is no stranger to Your Lordship and the Johor Bar – as he was a High Court judge who retired from the High Court at Johor Bahru not too long ago.

The town of Gemas in Negeri Sembilan could be considered the hometown of the late Dato’ Teo as he received his primary education at Kuo Min Chinese Primary School in Gemas and subsequently in a Chinese primary school in Tampoi, Johor Bahru. For his secondary education, he was a student at our well established English College in Johor Bahru. My Lord, lawyers are generally known to be poor in Mathematics but certainly not the late Dato’ Teo, who used to teach Additional Mathematics teacher in a high school. His teaching career, though a short stint, was most significant to his life because it led him to meet the true love of his life – the lovely young lady whom he subsequently married and who gave him all the love and support to pursue his future career as a lawyer. My Lord, at this juncture, may I mention that Dato’ Teo’s beloved wife Datin Cheng

MUNIRAH

TRIBUTE FOR THE LATE DATO’ TEO SAY KOON BY MR. GAN TECHIONG

Siew Fen is present in court today together with her three children.

What made the late Dato’ Teo, who was a Mathematics teacher, read law? In his case, due credit must be given to his fourth brother, Dato’ Teo Say Eng who set a precedent in the Teo family. As is common knowledge to members of the Johor Bar and judiciary, Dato’ Teo Say Eng served as a court interpreter before he read law at the University of Malaya. His sharing of interesting case laws and encouraging his younger brother to look at things in life from a legal perspective was no small inspiration for the younger brother. More important, Dato’ Teo Say Eng had shown him that it was possible to do it. After the late Dato’ Teo Say Koon shared his desire to read law with his beloved wife, they both decided to fly to England where Dato’ Teo Say Koon was to pursue a law degree while his wife would work to earn their living expenses whilst there. I was told, My Lord, that the late Dato’ Teo smiled every time he talked about their lives in England. To him, it was one of the most difficult period of his life, but also the simplest and happiest period. According to their children, Dato’ and Datin shared that they would bear the cold in their thin cotton jackets, and walked for 30 to 45 minutes every day to the university and workplace and again when returning home, just to save on bus fare. The late Dato’ Teo Say Koon shared that he must have been the luckiest man in the world because his wife, who worked at McDonald’s, would not eat the free meal given to her as an employee at her workplace. Instead, she would bear hunger so that she could bring the hamburger home to share with him every day. My Lord, I humbly submit that it is indeed a testimony of love which they shared and worthy of mention in these proceedings today. As the Teo family members are Christians, My Lord, I crave leave to be allowed to quote a verse from the Bible to honour the couple’s love. It is written in the Book of First Corinthians:

“Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends.”

Now, My Lord, may I be permitted to share about the late Dato’ Teo Say Koon’s legal career. After graduating with a law degree from the University of Staffordshire in England in 1987, he returned to Malaysia to study for the CLP Examinations. He passed in 1988 and commenced chambering as a pupil of the late Mr. Reginald Valipuram. He was called to the Bar in 1989 and worked very hard to gain as much experience as possible. He achieved his vision of starting his own

firm in 1990, under the name “Teo & Associates” as a sole proprietorship. His most faithful and capable beloved wife, Datin Cheng Siew Fen served as his secretary. She was also his chief clerk, his typist, his receptionist and his office manager because she was the only staff of Messrs. Teo & Associates 32 years ago in 1990. The diligence of the late Dato’ Teo, supported by a most supportive wife, allowed him to expanded his law firm with amazing speed, to a firm employing more than 30 people, including lawyers, in September last year. During his years of practice, Dato’ Teo contributed to the Bar by training several lawyers, two of who were his own children, Han Ley and Voon Anne who are now in charge of the law firm. The late Dato’ Teo Say Koon was a well-known litigator in handling motor vehicle accident cases. However, I am able to share that he had experience too in handling other civil cases, for the first time I met him was as my opponent in court more than 27 years ago in a contract law case. We became friends and never failed to stop for a chat whenever we saw each other in court. Thus, as with many who have had the privilege of knowing the late Dato’ Teo Say Koon, I couldn’t help feeling the loss of a personal friend when I heard that God had taken him in September last year.

There was a biblical verse which the late Dato’ Teo repeatedly reminded his children. It was: “Do not withhold good from those whom it is due, when it is in your power to act”. Being a devoted Christian, Dato’ Teo believed that true happiness comes from being able to help and give to the society without expecting anything in return. For that reason, despite his busy schedule as a litigation lawyer, he was actively involved in various associations and schools in order to help the less fortunate ones, to the best of his ability. He served in various honorary capacities, as Chairman, Consultant, Legal Adviser respectively of numerous associations, schools and universities both locally and abroad. He was the former Chairman, Honorary Chairman and Conference Consultant of Johor Eng Choon Association. He was also the former Chairman, Honorary Chairman and Conference Consultant of Eng Teck Association Johor Bahru, former Malaysia Eng Choon Federation Cultural Director, former Malaysia Hokkien Society Federation Financial Director, a Council Member of the Malaysian Dato’ Entrepreneurs Association. Dato’ Teo was also an Honorary Consultant of SJK(C) Foon Yew 4 and Legal Adviser of SJK(C) Tampoi Alumni Association. In recognition of his contributions, various buildings, halls, classrooms in many schools and universities were named after him, even though

he did not request for it. My Lord, I was told that there is even a Dato’ Teo Say Koon Cup for a table tennis tournament.

The late Dato’ Teo was not only generous, he was also magnanimous as could be seen from his deeds. Some years ago he had paid for a new signboard to be made for his office but the craftsman made a mistake. Instead of scolding him, Dato’ Teo took out a cheque book and wrote a cheque for the craftsman to make a correct one, so that the craftsman would not lose any money from making a mistake. This was not hearsay because it was related to me by the craftsman himself, who was very touched by Dato’ Teo’s magnanimous gesture. His generosity was well known too as he made financial contributions as well as giving his time for many charitable causes.

My Lord, I must not omit to mention that the late Dato’ Teo concluded a trial on the day when God took him. According to his son Han Ley, he was actually feeling unwell in the morning but decided to defer going to see a doctor because he didn’t want to seek a postponement of a trial. He was a real litigation lawyer who did his best for his clients, to the last hours of his life in this world. He surely qualified to recite the biblical verse: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.”

Though we all still feel a great loss, I personally hope that Dato’ Teo’s beloved wife and children could be consoled by the fact that he led a really successful life; having married a woman who truly loved him very much, who together with him built up a successful law firm and seeing all their 3 children graduated from university. God also allowed him to see his first grandchild before taking him to a place, which we believe is a better place than this world, for him to rest.

Once again, on behalf of the Teo family and the Johor Bar, I thank Your Lordship for allocating this honourable court’s precious time to remember a respected member of the Johor Bar. I humbly pray for an Order that the record of the reference proceedings today may kept in the High Court’s archives, and a copy thereof given to Datin Cheng Siew Fen and the Johor Bar Committee for them to keep in memory of the late Dato’ Teo Say Koon.

GAN TECHIONG MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

THE LATE

NOORDIN

Dengan izin Yg Arif,

Mr. R Jayabalan, wakil Persatuan Peguam Johor berserta Majlis Peguam berserta Puan Zahilah binti Mohammad Yusoff, wakil Peguam Negara.

Di pagi yang hening ini, kita berkumpul di Mahkamah yang Mulia ini untuk memberi penghormatan kepada rakan-rakan peguam Johor yang telah meninggalkan kita dan saya Mohd Rasheed Hassan telah diminta untuk memberi penghormatan dan mengimbau kembali “the life of” rakan kepada semua peguam di Mahkamah Johor Bahru iaitu Arwah Tn Hj Noordin bin Hussin.

Yang Arif, izinkan saya berucap dalam Bahasa Melayu dan disulami dengan Bahasa Inggeris.

Arwah Tn Hj Noordin bin Hussin telah di lahirkan di Pulau Pinang pada 5 May 1951. Tn Hj Noordin mempunyai 3 adik beradik, 2 lelaki dan 1 perempuan dan Arwah merupakan anak ke 2.

Tn Hj Noordin memulakan pendidikan di Sek Keb. Stowell, Bukit Mertajam dan seterusnya di Bukit Mertajam High School. Setelah GCE (STPM ketika itu) pada tahun 1971, beliau telah memulakan pekerjaan sebagai seorang anggota polis.

Arwah telah berkahwin dengan Pn Noraina binti Mohamed pada 25 Ogos 1976 dan seterusnya telah ke London pada tahun yang sama dan pada tahun 1978 beliau telah di “called as an Utter Barrister-atLaw” di Lincoln’s Inn.

TRIBUTE FOR

HAJI

BIN HUSSIN BY EN. MOHD RASHEED BIN HASSAN

Sekembalinya ke Malaysia, Arwah telah memulakan kerjayanya bukan sebagai seorang peguam tetapi sebagai seorang pegawai polis dengan pangkat ASP iaitu Assistant Superintendent dan pada tahun 1979, beliau menjawat jawatan sebagai PO atau “Prosecuting Officer” bagi Polis DiRaja Malaysia. Ketika itu juga, beliau telah berpindah dan memulakan hidup berkeluarga di Johor Bahru.

Pada 8 Julai 1980, Arwah telah didaftarai dan disenaraikan sebagai seorang Peguambela dan Peguamcara di Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya.

Tn Hj Noordin telah memulakan kerjaya sebagai seorang peguam di Tetuan Tan & Tan dan kemudiannya di Tetuan Leng & Co. Pada Mei 1984, Arwah telah berganding dengan Mr Tia Chak Yit dan menubuhkan firma “Tia & Noordin”.

Arwah dan isterinya Pn Noraina telah dikurniakan 2 cahaya mata, seorang perempuan kakak dan adik lelaki, En Fuad yang hadir pada hari ini bersama isterinya. Isteri Arwah telah meninggal pada 2009 disebabkan kanser.

Beliau merupakan jiran saya dan walau saya tidaklah boleh dikatakan sebagai sahabat rapat Arwah, saya percaya bahawa semua peguam litigasi di Johor akan mengatakan bahawa Arwah adalah seorang yang amat senang disantuni. Beliau amat berpengalaman dalam kes-kes litigasi civil dan jenayah dan tidak lokek untuk berkongsi maklumat dan pendapat. Arwah amat mudah untuk diajak berbual, tidak kesah dengan peguam muda atau yang sebaya dengannya. Senyuman sentiasa terukir dibibirnya.

Seminggu sebelum kepulangan Arwah ke Illahi, saya tersempak beliau di satu kedai makan di Bandar Baru UDA di mana kami hendak membeli balik sarapan. Sebagai biasa, “normal banter between us ensued” dengan kami berbual hal politik dan sebagainya.

Saya agak terperanjat apabila menerima berita pemergian Arwah memandangkan beliau kelihatan agak sehat seminggu sebelumnya. Tetapi itulah berkenaan kematian. Ianya pasti dan masanya hanyalah ketentuan Yang Esa. Tn Hj Noordin telah meninggal pada 29 Disember 2021. Beliau “collapsed” ketika hendak mengambil wudhu untuk solat Dhuha dan menghembuskan nafas terakhir pada tengah harinya.

Pemergian Arwah saya percaya amatlah dirasai anakanaknya, cucu-cucunya, saudara maranya dan juga kita, rakan-rakan peguam beliau.

He was a jovial and friendly person. Arwah tentunya akan diingati oleh semua yang mengenalinya dan ditinggalkannya.

Sebelum saya mengakhir, izinkan saya membaca satu poem oleh Christina Rossetti (circa 1850s) yang saya percaya “reflects Arwah’s sentiments and personalities”:-

Remember me when I am gone away, Gone far away into the silent land; When you can no more hold me by the hand, Nor I half turn to go yet turning stay.

Remember me when no more day by day You tell me of our future that you plann’d: Only remember me; you understand It will be late to counsel then or pray.

Yet if you should forget me for a while And afterwards remember, do not grieve: For if the darkness and corruption leave A vestige of the thoughts that once I had, Better by far you should forget and smile Than that you should remember and be sad.

Yang Arif, sebagai penutup, saya dengan rendah diri mengusulkan agar sesalinan transkrip proceeding hari ini disimpan di arkib Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini dan sesalinannya diserahkan kepada waris Arwah yang kita kenang dan ingati.

Sekian, much obliged My Lord.

MOHD RASHEED BIN HASSAN MEMBER OF JOHORE BAR

MEMBERS

Dengan Izin Yang Arif, Pada hari ini, kita sama-sama berkumpul untuk menghormati dan memperingati Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang telah meninggalkan kita buat selamalamanya.

Justeru itu, saya hadir prosiding pagi ini bagi pihak YBhg. Tan Sri Peguam Negara Malaysia bagi menyampaikan rasa dukacita beliau atas ketidakhadiran beliau pada prosiding hari ini atas kekangan tugas rasmi. Saya juga turut hadir bagi pihak kesemua pegawai Perkhidmatan Kehakiman dan Perundangan bagi melahirkan perasaan sedih kami di atas pemergian Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia ini serta menyampaikan ucapan salam takziah kami kepada keluarga mereka.

Prosiding rujukan memperingati Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang nama-namanya disebut sebentar tadi oleh rakan-rakan bijaksana saya adalah begitu istimewa dan cukup bermakna dengan kehadiran ahli keluarga dan sahabat handai serta kenalan Ahliahli Majlis Peguam Malaysia yang diperingati hari ini.

Yang Arif, Walau pun pepatah ada mengatakan “Patah Tumbuh, Hilang Berganti” tetapi kita sedar bahawa “Yang tumbuh dan yang diganti tersebut tidak mungkin sama dengan yang hakiki”. Pemergian Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang diperingati telah meninggalkan kenangan yang tidak dapat dilupakan terutamanya bagi ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang rapat dan lebih mengenali mereka.

Yang Arif, Dari biodata mereka, saya pasti, kita lebih mengenali mereka melalui nama baik, reputasi dan legasi mereka lebih-lebih lagi sumbangan mereka dalam profesyen kepeguaman. Bak kata pepatah “Harimau mati meninggalkan belang, manusia mati meninggalkan nama”. Saya pasti mereka telah memainkan peranan yang aktif dalam sama-sama membentuk dan memacu hala tuju negara Malaysia yang tercinta.

Yang Arif, Sekali lagi bagi pihak YBhg. Tan Sri Peguam Negara

Malaysia, saya menyampaikan salam takziah kepada seluruh keluarga dan rakan taulan Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang diperingati dengan petikan kata-kata:

“Those we love don’t walk away, they walk beside us every day. Unseen, unheard but always near, still loved, still missed and very dear.”

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 Ahli-ahli Majlis Peguam yang diperingati yang kita kenang dan ingati pada hari ini. Terima kasih.

ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF PENGARAH GUAMAN NEGERI JOHOR

CLOSING SPEECH BY MR. R JAYABALAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOHORE BAR

My Lord, my learned friends have spoken well of the departed members. The Johore Bar shares the sentiments expressed by them. May I now add a few words on behalf of the Johore Bar about the departed members.

The late Hj Noordin was a very senior member of the Bar, having been in practice for about 40 years at the time of his passing. He was called to the Bar on 8.7.1980. His partnership firm Tia & Noordin was established on May 1984 – one of the oldest partnership in Johor.

He was a very likeable person and a friend of everyone. For a senior lawyer, he was down to earth, approachable and popular at the Bar. He was always in jovial mood and often had a funny tale to tell. It was hard to tell that he was a former senior police officer and prosecuting officer. He was also a source of tickling anecdotes about lawyers in town – all no doubt gathered during his long years at practice and friendly banter with all lawyers.

Hj Noordin was an active criminal law practitioner.

Johore Bar | info.johorebar.org.my

SPEECH BY PN ZAHILAH BINTI MOHAMMAD YUSOFF IN HER TRIBUTE TO THE DEPARTED

He was one of the most senior lawyers serving under the Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan scheme at Johore Bar. He was like a YBGK special task officer – the more difficult cases, the ones before the more ‘daunting’ judicial officers and the more difficult YGBK clients are usually handed over to him as he, with his charming self and fatherly nature was quite astute in convincing the courts on his plea and in convincing clients to take up the advice. His death is indeed a loss to the Johore Bar and for the YBGK scheme in Johore. We will certainly miss our dear old Noordin.

Dato Teo Say Koon was also a senior member of the Johore Bar with more than 30 years in practice. As well said by my learned friend Mr Gan, Dato Teo –or just Teo to most of us - came up in life through the hard way and was a self made man – and was ably supported by his loving wife Datin Cheng Siew Fen in his journey from a Mathematics teacher to become a lawyer. He did his pupillage around 1988 with another well known personality of the Johore Bar Mr Reginald Vallipuram – who sadly also passed away last year, few months before Teo.

Teo had established a well known firm in Johor Bahru, Teo & Associates mostly handling running down claims – and quite formidable in this area as well. He was ably assisted in his practice by his two children and at his firm by his wife. He was known as a very generous employer by his staff and even by his lawyers.

Teo was also very supportive of the Johore Bar. He regularly attended Bar events and generously contributed to the Bar. Be it at the Bar events, or whilst waiting for cases to be called he enjoyed engaging in chatting and friendly banter with fellow lawyers about his cases and claims. He was quite a sport despite the friendly jabs during banters. We will miss Teo especially at downstairs Level 23A.

The late Azmi is yet another young lawyer that we have lost in recent years. Azmi was a quiet, soft spoken and respectful person. He was always polite and always acknowledged others at the court corridors especially the senior lawyers even when he may not have known them close.

Despite his youth, he had always been ready to take on challenging matters especially under the YBGK scheme. He was a regulator contributor to the YBGK scheme. He also supported the Johore Bar - he was one of the regular players for our Johore Bar football team. His untimely death at young age came as a shock and he will be dearly missed.

The late Arwa was also a young member and had been in practice for about 16 years when she passed away. She was also an active YBGK lawyer. I do not have the benefit of knowing Arwa personally but from what I have heard from her friends and from my learned friend Pn Munirah, Arwa seemed to be someone who was determined to do well in legal practice and had perhaps gone too soon before realizing all her aspirations. I associate myself fully with the sentiments expressed by my learned friend about her.

The departed members were good colleagues at the Bar, their comradeship and contribution at the Bar will be remembered. The Johore Bar is proud to acknowledge them as one of our own.

The Johore Bar shares the pain of the families in their bereavement. To the families, our words would perhaps be of little consolation as compared to your loss but you will leave today with the pride knowing that your loved ones lived a good life at the Bar and will be cherished by their colleagues. May their soul rest in peace.

With that, My Lord, the Johore Bar supports the motion from my learned friends respectively, for the records of this proceedings to be kept and preserved in the archives of this Honorable Court, and that a copy thereof be extended to the bereaved families. Much obliged, My Lord.

R JAYABALAN CHAIRMAN, JOHORE BAR

PICTURES AT REFERENCE

Johore Bar

Family member of late Datuk Freddie Long

Family member of late John Ang Soon Ho

Family member of late Ganeson al Gunathan

Family member of late Reginald Vallipuram and members of the Bar

Family member of late Mohd Fairuz bin Mahmood

Family member of late Mar Sze Wei

Family member of late Yap Siong Cheng

REFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Family member of late Dato’ Teo Say Koon

Lawyers from Messrs Abdul Rahman Saad Associates

Family member of late Azmi bin Ahmad Bakri

Lawyers and staff of Messrs Teo Associates

Family member of late Haji Noordin bin Hussin

In MeMorIa M

Azmi bin Ahmad Bakri 19 Aug 2021 K Gnasegaran a/l Rangasamy 30 July 2021

Arwa binti Hj. Abdul Rahman 9 Sept 2021 Dato’ Teo Say Koon 16 Sept 2021 Haji Noordin bin Hussin 29 Dec 2021 Daniel Tay Choon Beng 16 May 2022 Lim Seng Bock 23 July 2022

Mazihana binti Omar 5 Aug 2022 Dato’ Yeo Hock Thye 8 Oct 2022 Md Zahar bin Ngah 4 Dec 2022 *Reference Proceedings will be held for the departed members in due course.

ATHIRAH

FAREHAH

KWEE YEOW &

NIK & WONG

& JOSEPH

BAKHTIAR ZAID IBRAHIM & CO 14/03/2022 50 FARAH MADIHAH BINTI IDROS FADZILAH, ZAINAB & PARTNERS 20/03/2022 51 NOR ADIBAH BINTI MOHD SITH V M KUMARAN & CO 20/03/2022 52 NURSYAHIRA BINTI SAMA’ON V M KUMARAN & CO 20/03/2022 53 ZAYFUL AMIN BIN ZAKARIA ANANDAN KRISHNAN, SAHRIHAN & PARTNERS 20/03/2022 54 NURHANNA NISA BINTI ROSLAN CHRIS LEE & PARTNERS 20/03/2022 55 WENDY CHYE PEI RU GAN & ZUL 20/03/2022 56 FARAH KHAIRUNNISA BINTI JAJULI DZULKIFLI JAAFAR NIZAM & CO 27/03/2022 57 MAISARAH BINTI ROSLEE RAHIM, AIDIL & PARTNERS 27/03/2022

CONGRATULATIONS!

NO. NAME FIRM

DATE 146 HARSINIY A/P SHANMUGAM OTHMAN HASHIM & CO 18/10/2022 147 MOHAMMAD FARHAN BIN MOHD FUAD DZULKIFLI JAAFAR NIZAM & CO 18/10/2022 148 AQILAH KHALIDAH BINTI SHAFEIE KAMAL HISHAM & ASSOCIATES 18/10/2022 149 KEE PING YING CLARENCE EDWIN LAW OFFICES 18/10/2022 150 ALENA WE YAN TING JONATHAN & LING 18/10/2022 151 MAUNG YONG SHIN ANTHONY CLARENCE EDWIN LAW OFFICES 31/10/2022 152 WOO JIA HUI SOO HOO & COMPANY 31/10/2022 153 WONG WAN RU ROGER TAN & PARTNERS 31/10/2022 154 FARRAH SURAYA BINTI RAZALI TEH KIM TEH, SALINA & CO 31/10/2022 155 MUHAMMAD NUR FARHAN BIN AMDAN SUHAILA, ZAINUDDIN & PARTNERS 31/10/2022 156 FAZLYN YU BINTI MOHD FARID YU AZMI & ASSOCIATES 31/10/2022 157 NUHA BINTI KHAIRUDDIN AZMI & ASSOCIATES 31/10/2022 158 LOO SAI MEON SYED ALWI, NG & CO 23/11/2022 159 IRHAM HUSNA BINTI MOHD NADZRI IKBAL SALAM & ASSOCIATES 23/11/2022 160 LOW SONG KUAN K S PANG & CO 23/11/2022 161 UNGKU SYAZA AFIQAH BINTI UNGKU ABD RAHMAN ZAINUL

JOHORE BAR STATISTICS AS AT 31 JULY 2022 LAW FIRMS LAWYERS

Total Membership

As at 31 July 2022, the total membership of the Johore Bar is 2462. There has been an increase of 126 members since the last statistics (on 31 July 2021). The total membership of the Johore Bar constitutes 11% approx. of that of the Malaysian Bar.

Lawyers in Johor Bahru

There are 1724 members practising in the city of Johor Bahru. They account for 70% of the total membership in the State of Johor (i.e. 1724/2462 members).

Law Firms in Johor Bahru

The total number of law firms in the State of Johor is 937. There has been an increase of 73 law firms since July 2021. The number of law firms in Johor Bahru has increased (from 517 to 561). They constitute 59% approx. (i.e. 561/937) of the law firms in the State of Johor.