Deidra Sharina & Co.

On the court record

Deidra Sharina & Co. appears in the reported judgments as a civil, company and land-litigation practice, working mainly in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) with matters in the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan). Civil procedure is a recurring theme, including an interlocutory injunction met by a preliminary objection seeking the disqualification of the opposing solicitors, and appeals from the Sessions Court, including a breach-of-contract claim founded on non-payment. Its company and insolvency work includes a winding-up petition founded on a company's inability to pay its debt, the service of a statutory notice and the underlying judgment debt, in a matter between two trading companies, and a winding-up petition brought on the same ground in a matter involving a construction company. A distinct strand of the firm's corpus concerns land, including appeals arising from a High Court judgment in a land-fraud case and an application to cancel a private caveat lodged against a title. The firm also appears in banking and commercial matters, including a dispute involving the Export-Import Bank of Malaysia Berhad and an energy company. The counterparties in the corpus include financial institutions, trading and construction companies and individuals. Acting for plaintiffs, respondents, defendants, petitioners and appellants across these matters, the firm presents as a general litigator whose corpus joins civil-procedure and Sessions Court appeal work to company winding-up and land disputes, moving between the commercial and property fields rather than concentrating on a single specialism. The winding-up matters in particular recur, engaging the court in the familiar question whether a company's failure to meet a statutory demand demonstrates an inability to pay its debts, while the land-fraud and caveat matters test competing claims to registered title. The disqualification-of-solicitors point is a distinctive procedural feature, since a court asked to restrain a party's chosen lawyers must balance the integrity of the proceedings against a litigant's right to be represented by counsel of choice, and the firm's corpus shows that tension being argued at the interlocutory stage.