MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA vs AHMAD RUSHDI OMAR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 MarsdenLR 954

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
AHMAD RUSHDI OMAR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Farez Jinnah ,Respondent Advocate: Abdul Haris Abdul Malik

Table of Content
1. a disbarred advocate seeks restoration after a significant timeline. (Para 1 , 3 , 5 , 10)
2. circumstances leading to initial disbarment. (Para 4 , 8)
3. court must critically assess character change and public interest for restoration. (Para 6 , 14 , 17 , 18)
4. requisite statutory grounds for restoration applications. (Para 15)
5. court's discretion must focus on fairness and rehabilitative evidence. (Para 20)

[1] This is an appeal by the Appellant against of the decision of the High Court of Kuala Terengganu dated 13th April 2015 in allowing the Respondent's application for restoration to the Roll as an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya under s 107(4) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 ( LPA ).

[2] The instant appeal was heard on 2nd June 2016 wherein we had unanimously allowed the appeal with no order as to costs. We append below our grounds for doing so. We will refer the parties as they were described in the High Court.

Brief Facts Gemaine To The Appeal

[3] The facts are elucidated from the various affidavits, the judgment of the learned High Court Judge and the written submissions of respective parties. The salient facts as alluded to by the re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 MarsdenLR 954

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAMAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA – AppellantVersusAHMAD RUSHDI OMAR – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
AHMAD RUSHDI OMAR – Respondent