Legal professionals must maintain decorum and avoid defamatory statements in correspondence with the judiciary; procedural fairness does not necessitate a clear charge or reasons for lesser penalties.

The Factual Background

[1] The respondent and his wife were involved in a judicial separation proceeding. The wife was represented by the appellant. The respondent, who was also then a practising advocate and solicitor, lodged seven complaints to the Bar Council against the appellant, which are the subject matter of the appeal herein.

[2] The complaint emanated from a letter dated 16 December 2013 ("the impugned letter") from the appellant to the Judge of the High Court ("Family Division"), which was addressed to her Ladyship's secretary.

[3] The impugned letter states inter alia as follows:

We ask the learned judge to take cognizance of the Respondent's unbecoming behaviour which is becoming intolerable.

[4] The respondent took umbrage to the content of the impugned letter. It is the respondent's complaint that the appellant made libellous statements and defamatory remarks against him. According to the respondent, the impugned letter "is an act laden with malice and it has caused damages to my good name and reputation as an Advocate and Solicitor".

[5] The respondent asserted that the impugned letter contained further allegations that:

(a) The appellant described that the respondent had filed "unnecessary vexatious applications"; and

(b) That the respondent was "behaving like a vexatious litigant".

[6] Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the Disciplinary Committee ("DC") found that the appellant was guilty under the 7th complaint. The 7th complaint is anchored on the impugned letter.

[7] The DC held that the libellous statement and defamatory remark against a lawyer in writing to a judge who is hearing and deciding the case is serious misconduct. According to the DC, the said misconduct was in breach of s 94(3)(o) and (d) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (" LPA ") as well as rr 18, 31 and 32 of the of the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 ("the 1978 Rules"). Rule 18 and r 31 provide as follows:

[18] The conduct of an advocate and solicitor before the Court and in relation to other advocates and solicitors shall be characterised by candour, courtesy and fairness.

[31] Every advocate and solicitor shall at all times uphold the dignity and high standing of his profession.

[8] In its Report, which relates to the 7th complaint, which is the subject matter of this Originating Summons ("OS"), the DC was of the view that the appellant had committed "a serious misconduct". According to the DC, the appellant made defamatory remarks against a lawyer in writing to a judge who heard and eventually determined the case. The DC then went on to conclude:

This conduct is unacceptable. We considered both the Respondents['] response and submission but found that their conduct was unbefitting of an advocate and solicitor which clearly brings the legal profession into disrepute.

[9] The DC then recommended a fine of RM30,000 to be imposed on the appellant.

[10] The matter was brought before the Disciplinary Board ("the DB") for consideration under s 103D of the LPA .

[11] The DB found that the appellant was guilty under the 7th complaint only on the ground that the appellant's conduct was in breach of s 94(3)(d) of the LPA .

[12] On 19 November 2021, the DB made the following amended order against the appellant (which was referred to as the 1st respondent"):

In respect of the 7th complaint against the 1st Respondent, the Disciplinary Board affirmed the Disciplinary Committee's finding of liability but rejected