Shafee & Co.

On the court record

Shafee & Co. appears in the reported judgments as a litigation practice combining criminal defence with revenue and commercial disputes, working across the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi), the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) and the Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan). A distinctive feature of its corpus is that it appears as defence counsel for the accused (counsel_accused) in serious criminal matters — including charges under sections 39B, 9 and 6B of the Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) prosecuted by the Timbalan Pendakwa Raya (the Deputy Public Prosecutor) — a role few private firms in the corpus occupy. On the revenue side it acts for taxpayers in appeals brought under paragraph 34 of Schedule 5 to the Income Tax Act 1967 against the Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri (the Director General of Inland Revenue). Its commercial and company work includes fraudulent-trading claims and the court's discretion to adjourn a hearing, winding up and post-winding-up applications under section 471 of the Companies Act 2016, and the setting aside of a judgment on the ground of fraud on the court, with the associated questions of the probative value of dishonest or fraudulent testimony. It also appears in bankruptcy, judicial review, arbitration proceedings, and a banking dispute over the bank–customer duty of confidentiality. Its counterparties in the corpus include industrial and trading companies. Acting variously as respondent, appellant, defence counsel, defendant and applicant, the firm presents as a broad litigation practice whose corpus is notable for pairing criminal defence with substantial tax and commercial disputes. Its arbitration matters include acting where a party has commenced arbitration proceedings and the related court applications that follow, and its judicial-review work tests the decisions of public bodies. The combination of defence advocacy in drug and other serious prosecutions with tax appeals against the revenue and company disputes over fraudulent trading and the setting aside of judgments is an unusually wide span, and it places the firm among the few private practices in the corpus to appear both against the Public Prosecutor in criminal matters and against the Director General of Inland Revenue in revenue appeals.