SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 MarsdenLR 2284

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GIDEON TAN – Appellant
Versus
TEY POR YEE & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Legal professional privilege is generally considered absolute and covers communications between a client and their legal representative, including related documents and information. The privilege is designed to protect the confidentiality of such communications to ensure open and honest dialogue between clients and their lawyers.

Based on the provided document, the privilege extends to the communications and information that originated from the client, which would naturally include the client's identity, such as their name. The court reaffirmed that privilege is protected from public interest considerations and can only be waived by the client. The document emphasizes that the privilege applies to information and communications originating from the client, and it is protected unless explicitly waived by the client (!) (!) (!) (!) .

Therefore, the name of the client, being part of the communication or information originating from the client, is included within the scope of legal professional privilege as per the principles outlined in the document.


Table of Content
1. overview of appeals arising from a high court ruling on legal privilege. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6)
2. understanding the foundation of the appeal based on privilege and representation. (Para 4)
3. key findings on legal professional privilege as per malaysian law. (Para 16)
4. arguments against the applicability of legal professional privilege in committal proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
5. arguments against application of privilege raised in context of alleged wrongdoing. (Para 22)

[1] There are two interrelated appeals before us: Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM) (NCC)-1322-08-2015 and Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCC)-1323-08-2015. Both appeals arose out of the Kuala Lumpur High Courts decision given on 5 August 2015 (Abu Bakar Jais JC presiding), allowing the respondents two separate applications (encls 82 and 75) to expunge certain paragraphs and exhibits in the affidavit in support affirmed by the appellant.

[2] The appellant in both these appeals is Gideon Tan. He is an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya. The respondents are, respectively, Tey Por Yee and Ooi Kock Aun. They were the appellants former clients.

[3] At the conclusion of the hearing, we were satisfied

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top