Abdul Malik Ishak J:

Facts Of The Case

The plaintiff is a well-known entity in Malaysia. It is a body corporate established under the Legal Profession Act 1976 (Act 166) (hereinafter referred to as "the Legal Profession Act 1976") and it has its address at the 10th Floor, Wisma Kraftangan, No: 9 Jalan Tun Perak 50050 Kuala Lumpur.

The defendant is an obscure private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act 1965 on 21 December 1998 and has a share capital and purportedly engaged in the business of general trading. The defendant has its registered address at No: 40-2, Tingkat 2, Jalan 14/48A, Off Jalan Sentul, Sentul Raya, 51000 Kuala Lumpur. The defendant has a business address at No: 26B, Jalan Tengku Ampuan Zabedah K, Seksyen 9, 40100 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

The plaintiff's statutory objects as stated under the Legal Profession Act 1976 may be itemised, inter alia, as follows:

(a) To represent, protect and assist members of the legal profession in Malaysia and to promote in any proper manner the interests of the legal profession in Malaysia;

(b) to protect and assist the public in all matters be it ancillary or incidental to the law; and

(c) to promote good relations and social intercourse amongst members of the Malaysian Bar and between members of the Malaysian Bar and other persons concerned in the administration of law and justice in Malaysia.

There was evidence emanating from Mr. Cheng Poh Heng, an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya and a member of the plaintiff that august body, that the defendant was plying its trade which encroached into the legal profession of the country. Indeed on 22 July 2001, the defendant at the Mines Shopping Fair at Jalan Dulang, off the Mines Resort City, 43300 Seri Kembangan, Selangor Darul Ehsan through its agents, servants and/or employees did, inter alia, advertise and offer to members of the Malaysian public legal services under the caption "The Rights Program" and these legal services covered wide ranging topics in the following areas:

(1) road traffic accidents;

(2) airport arrest;

(3) debt recovery;

(4) workers' compensation;

(5) assault, battery, homicide and bail;

(6) embezzlement;

(7) possession of illicit drugs and narcotics;

(8) possession of illegal weapons, firearms and illegal goods;

(9) drunk driving;

(10) domestic violence;

(11) family court matters including polygamy;

(12) will and probate matters;

(13) appeals;

(14) breach of contract;

(15) criminal breach of trust;

(16) medico-legal;

(17) tort;

(18) consumer rights and defective goods;

(19) motor vehicle repossession;

(20) unauthorised withdrawal from bank account;

(21) sale and purchase of property;

(22) domestic inquiry;

(23) insurance claims;

(24) unfair dismissal; and

(25) sexual discrimination and sexual harassment.

The defendant also advertised to the members of the public that it:

(a) provided advice on broad and specialised areas of the law including corporate legal advice, advice on syariah law, tax, investment and audit; and

(b) was the only law related entity, being the first of its kind to operate in the region, providing affordable legal remedy and redress to members of the public.

The defendant launched vigorous advertising. It printed and distributed pamphlets, leaflets and/or other advertising materials to the public in order to promote its services to the members of the public. The defendant even went to the extent of prescribing the following prescribed fees:

TYPES ANNUAL FEES ANNUAL FEES

(INDIVIDUAL) (FAMILY)

SILVER RM450 RM500

GOLD RM750 RM800

PLATINUM RM1,050 RM1,050

CORPORATE RM2,500 NOT AVAILABLE

Mr. Cheng Poh Heng was not pleased with the antics of the defendant and so he reported to the Secretary of the Bar Council Malaysia as to what he saw at the Mines Shopping Fair. His letter was dated 23 July 2001 and it can be seen in exh. "RS1" to the plaintiff's first affidavit in encl. 6 that was affirmed on 6 May 2002 and it was worded in this way:

CHENG