1.

Duty of disclosure

• Pussuant to Rondel v Worsley, A/S , as an o cer of court, has an overriding duty to court. It
is the paramount duty of counsel to thoroughly research the law and the court to arrive at a
just decision. Counsel must not mislead the court and must not withhold any authorities or
document which may be against his client as it is not the duty of the court to do its own
research in every case for otherwise there would be no need for advocates because judges ca

2. Admission

• S19 - petitioner under s18 may appeal against decision of HC to FC

3. Contempt of court

• Contempt by general public

• Trustee of Leong ETC v SM Idris

• Charged for contempt, sentenced to a ne

• Types of contempt - disobedience of court orders , statements

• Contempt in the face of the court - happen in the courtroom in the presence of the
presiding judge , have personal knowledge

• Karam singh - shouting , not follow court orders , behaviour of counsel

• Kumendran - make intimidating statements assign the presiding judge,

challenging the authority of the court.

• Tai Choi You - allege judge is bias

• Zainur Zakaria v PP - Before court should act against them, safeguards to be

invoked ; specify the charge to the A/S, give reasonable right to prepare his
case by virtue of natural justice

• Scandalising the court - scurrilous remarks or attack on the juduciary, court system or
a particular judge. Generally occur outside courtroom

• AG v Arthur Lee - letters to judge, make personal attack on judges ,

• Trustee of Leong ETC v SM Idris - attack on the decision of judge

• R v Grey -

• AG v Manjit singh - attack on the judge

• Must exercise reasonable courtesy, within limit

• Scope to punish

• S13 CJA - take cognisance of any contempt and power to punish, discretion on the
imposition of ne and imprisonment - eg Tai Choi YU - 1 month imprisonment

• A126

• Third schedule para26 SCA - power to take cognisance of contempt, RM300 ne /

imprisonment of 6 weeks by session court ;

• Who can initiate contempt proceedings

• Contempt in the face of court - Judge should not invoke summary jurisdiction , should
refer the matter to regulating body

• Scandalising the court - any party that is aggrieved by the statements , AG also can

• AG can because it is the protector of public interest , duty to protect the

judiciary as well

• Sub judice comments

• adverse comments made about a pending proceeding that would prejudice the mind
of the judge/presiding o cer

• Test - comments tend to interfere with due course of justice, and there must be real
risk as opposed to remote possibility of interference with justice

• “ it is generally considered improper for publications be made in respect of on-

going court cases which are pending judicial determination. As stated earlier, sub
judice is part of the law of contempt, which in turn is especially concerned with
interference with the due administration of justice and the legal process which
invariably extends to the right of an accused to a fair trial.”

• “The rule on sub judice therefore seeks to safeguard the sanctity of court proceedings
and ensure a fair trial to an accused in a criminal trial. It is rudimentary that decisions
on issues of fact and law should be immune from every irrelevant and extraneous
consideration. Decisions should be on the basis of evidence produced in court, and
nothing else.”

fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
 • “concept of sub judice are designed to deal with three not unrelated key
considerations. First, to prevent persons involved in the proceedings such as
witnesses and jurors from being in uenced by the prejudicial publication; secondly to
avoid prejudgment of court decisions; and thirdly, to stop others from usurping the
judicial functions of the courts.”

4. Disciplinary proceedings

• s94(1) - AS subject to disciplinary actions of disciplinary board

• DB is created pursuant to s93, the composition

• Once DB made a decision by virtue of s103D, any party who is aggrieved by the decision of
the decision has the right to appeal against such decision within 1 month from the decision.

• Appeal shall be by OM supported by a davits

• The appeal rules must be complied with

• s103E(7) - DB shall not be cited as a party.

• s103E(6) - DB allowed to intervene at any stage

• Should cite Malaysia bar as

fl
ffi