The court emphasized the necessity of separate bills for distinct legal matters to prevent client prejudice and ensure compliance with the applicable statutes.

Introduction

[1] Although the Legal Profession Act 1976 gives some preferential treatment to an advocate and solicitor's claim for legal professional fees against his/ her client, there are still some checks-and-balances embodied in the Act to safeguard the position of the client vis-a-vis the advocate and solicitor.

[2] The present appeal is an example of a case where an advocate and solicitor's combination of several conveyancing matters and multiple contentious matters into a single invoice with a single total lump sum amount of claim for legal fees which has contravened the requirements of billing under the Legal Profession Act 1976 and to the prejudice of the client.

Background Facts

[3] The Respondent/Plaintiff is a firm of advocates and solicitors, while the Appellant/Defendant is a private limited company who was the client of the law firm.

[4] In the Respondent/Plaintiffs Invoice No 17418 dated 17 April 2018 (the subject matter of this suit) [Appeal Records, Jilid 2C (Enclosure 6), pp 557 to 567], the Respondent/Plaintiff listed in a table and appendices, a total of 12 items of which there were 8 different and separate Court cases (i.e. contentious matters) and 4 conveyancing matters (non-contentious matters), stated the dates of rendering the services and then put a single lump sum of RM300,000.00 as the fees for all the Court cases (contentious business) and conveyancing matters (non-contentious business) in combination.

[5] Subsequent to sending the said Invoice No 17418 dated 17 April 2018, the Respondent/Plaintiff in August 2019 filed the suit in the Sessions Court to claim for the said single lump sum fee of RM300,000.00 from the Appellant/ Defendant, their ex-client.

[6] After the trial of the action, the Sessions Court allowed the claims of the Respondent/Plaintiffs in full and ordered the Appellant/Defendant to pay the said single lump sum fee of RM300,000.00 and disbursements, interests and costs to the Respondent/Plaintiff, the law firm.

[7] On appeal, this Court on 10 November 2022, allowed the Appellant/ Defendant's appeal, set aside the Sessions Court's judgment, struck out the Respondent/Plaintiff's writ and statement of claim, and gave liberty for the Respondent/Plaintiff to file afresh upon the lapse of 1 month after the Respondent/Plaintiff's delivery of proper bills of costs to the Appellant/ Defendant.

[8] Dissatisfied, the Respondent/Plaintiff has appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Advocates And Solicitors' Remunerations Under The Legal Profession Act 1976

[9] Advocates and solicitors' remunerations for non-contentious business, i.e. including conveyancing matters, are specifically controlled and regulated by the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 1976 and the orders made thereunder. These statutory provisions include:

"The Solicitors Costs Committee

113.(3) The Solicitors Costs Committee or any four of the members of the Committee (the Chief Judge or his nominee being one) may make general orders prescribing and regulating in any manner as they think fair and reasonable the remuneration of advocates and solicitors in respect of non- contentious business and any order made under this section may revoke or alter any previous order so made. (6) So long as an order made under this section is in operation, taxation of bills of costs of advocates and solicitors in respect of non-contentious business shall, subject to s 121, be regulated by that order.

Advocate and solicitor may make agreement for remuneration from client

114.(1) Whether or not an