Zainun Ali JCA

[1]This appeal involves interesting issues, inter alia, those relating to the often tricky question of the extent in which a solicitor's relationship with his client becomes fiduciary.

[2]This appeal saw copious amounts of materials with 93 exhibits, 33 witnesses, 157 documents and close to 1,000 pages of notes of evidence, making it appear more complex and formidable than it is.

[3]However out of the morass, in my view only three issues present themselves for consideration. They are:

(a)whether the plaintiffs and others, ('plaintiffs and sub-purchasers') claiming to represent 213 others as original purchasers of the said land, retained an equitable right thereof, which was not extinguished despite the various subsequent dealings with the land;

(b)whether the first defendant acted as solicitor for the plaintiffs and thus had purchased the said land as their trustee — that the purchase was not done by the first defendant in his personal capacity but on behalf of the plaintiffs; and

(c)whether this suit amounts to a representative action.

[4]The appeal before us is against the decision of Abdull Hamid J (as His Lordship then was) made on 23 January 2006, where His Lordship di