TAN SRI DR MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH vs TOMMY THOMAS & ORS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 1459

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
TAN SRI DR MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH – Appellant
Versus
TOMMY THOMAS & ORS – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Muhammad Shafee Abdullah ,Respondent Advocate: Ambiga Sreenevasan,Michael Yap Chih Hong,Lim Wei Jit

Table of Content
1. motion to condemn member's conduct. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. the conduct of legal professionals must uphold the dignity of the profession. (Para 3)
3. claims of breaches of conduct and ethics. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. defamation claims must meet standards of justification. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
5. legal findings regarding statutory duties. (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20)
6. the obligation of legal professionals to maintain integrity involves their public actions. (Para 17)
7. judicial decisions on conduct are guided by defined legal precedents. (Para 21 , 22)
8. justification and qualified privilege defenses. (Para 27 , 36)

Genesis - The Motion

[1] The terms of the motion which was sought to be tabled at the Annual General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar dated 14 March 2015 (AGM) are these:

(a) WHEREAS barristers are members of a noble and honourable profession, and are expected to behave honourably at all times;

(b) WHEREAS barristers are prohibited from conducting themselves in any manner which would bring the legal profession into disrepute or which is likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession;

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 1459

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYATAN SRI DR MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH – AppellantVersusTOMMY THOMAS & ORS – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
TAN SRI DR MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH – Appellant
Versus
TOMMY THOMAS & ORS – Respondent