YEOH POH SAN & ANOR vs MAJLIS PEGUAM

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 1391

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
YEOH POH SAN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MAJLIS PEGUAM – Respondent

Table of Content
1. appeal against a disciplinary board ruling. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. facts relating to the conduct in question. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. judicial reasoning regarding board's authority. (Para 18 , 19 , 22 , 24)

Lim Yee Lan JCA:

Introduction

[1] This appeal by the appellants is against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court dated 14 December 2009, in allowing the Bar Council's appeal against the decision of the disciplinary board made on 9 December 2008.

[2] The disciplinary board in its decision dated 9 December 2008 had dismissed the Bar Council's complaint against the appellants for misconduct under the Legal Profession Act 1976 ("the Act").

[3] We had earlier allowed the appeal of the appellants and set aside the order of the High Court. These are the reasons for our decision.

Brief Facts

[4] The appellants were and still are advocates and solicitors practicing as partners in the name of Messrs Harun Idris, Yeoh & Partners ("the legal firm").

[5] The Bar Council had earlier made a complaint to the disciplinary board pursuant to s 99(3) of the Act against the appellants for allowing a perso

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 1391

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAYEOH POH SAN & ANOR – AppellantVersusMAJLIS PEGUAM – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
YEOH POH SAN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MAJLIS PEGUAM – Respondent