Tan Lay Ean v 1. ) Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James 2. ) Bar Council Malaysia

w-02a-1522-09-2023 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 19 January 2025 • W-02(A)-1522-09/2023 • 16 min read
3 cases cited (0 SG, 3 foreign)

Catchwords

Appeal against the decision to dismiss the Originating Summons filed pursuant to s. 103E of the Legal Profession Act, 197 -was it a misconduct to describe an opponent litigant, who was also by profession an advocate and solicitor, as a frivolous and vexatious litigant? - whether the DB should accord the appellant a right to be heard before the DB made its decision.

Practice Areas

Appeal against the decision to dismiss the Originating Summons filed pursuant to s. 103E of the Legal Profession Act, 197 -was it a misconduct to describe an opponent litigant, who was also by profession an advocate and solicitor, as a frivolous and vexatious litigant?

Judges (3)

Choo Kah Sing Delivered Faizah binti Jamaludin Coram Mariana binti Haji Yahya Coram

Counsel (9)

Arthur Wang, Lian & Associates Firm Kanesalingam & Co Firm Louis Ambrose & Partners Firm Arthur Wang Ming Way Counsel Intervener Jessica Chew Counsel Respondent Jonathan Gerard Counsel Respondent K. Shanmuga Counsel Appellant Natalie Jong Ling Li Counsel Appellant Nurufarhina binti Ab Rahim Counsel Intervener

Parties (3)

Bar Council Malaysia Respondent Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James Respondent Tan Lay Ean Appellant

Case Significance

Tan Lay Ean v 1. ) Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James 2. ) Bar Council Malaysia is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated January 19, 2025 (citation: w-02a-1522-09-2023). <p>Advocate Tan Lay Ean appealed against the High Court's dismissal of her challenge under Section 103E of the Legal Profession Act against the Disciplinary Board's finding that she committed misconduct by writing a letter directly to a High Court judge describing her opponent litigant as a frivolous and vexatious litigant. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the letter constituted professional misconduct and that the censure imposed was the lowest possible punishment, making The panel comprised Choo Kah Sing, Faizah binti Jamaludin and Mariana binti Haji Yahya, with Choo Kah Sing delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Arthur Wang Ming Way (counsel for intervener), Jessica Chew (counsel for respondent), Jonathan Gerard (counsel for respondent), K. Shanmuga (counsel for appellant), Natalie Jong Ling Li (counsel for appellant), Nurufarhina binti Ab Rahim (counsel for intervener).

Summary

Advocate Tan Lay Ean appealed against the High Court's dismissal of her challenge under Section 103E of the Legal Profession Act against the Disciplinary Board's finding that she committed misconduct by writing a letter directly to a High Court judge describing her opponent litigant as a frivolous and vexatious litigant. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the letter constituted professional misconduct and that the censure imposed was the lowest possible punishment, making any alleged breach of the right to be heard before the DB inconsequential.

What was the outcome of Tan Lay Ean v 1. ) Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James 2. ) Bar Council Malaysia?

<p>Advocate Tan Lay Ean appealed against the High Court's dismissal of her challenge under Section 103E of the Legal Profession Act against the Discip...

Cases Cited (3)

MY (3)
[2020] 9 CLJ 213 [2022] 3 MLJ 699 [2024] 1 CLJ 353