MICHAEL JOSEPH CARVALHO & ANOR v. MAJLIS PEGUAM MALAYSIA

[2022] 6 MLRA 194
Court of Appeal, Putrajaya
Has Zanah Mehat, Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, Nordin Hassan JJCA
[Civil Appeal No: A-02(A)-1697-09-2021]
Has Zanah Mehat, Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, Nordin Hassan JJCA

JUDGMENT

Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appellants claimed for compensation from the Advocates and Solicitors Compensation Fund ("Compensation Fund") established under the Legal Profession Act 1976 ("LPA"). The respondent informed the appellants that they were ineligible to make their claim, and thus refused to consider the appellants' application. The appellants then appealed that decision to the High Court vide an Originating Summons.

[2] The High Court found that the appellants' appeal had no merit and that the respondent had acted within its powers under s 80 of the LPA in rejecting the appellants' claim. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appellants' appeal.

[3] The appellants appealed that decision to this Court. We allowed the appeal for the following reasons.

Background Facts

[4] The appellants and their two other siblings had beneficial interest in their parents' house in Ipoh ("Property"). The Property was sold to Kawan Properties Sdn Bhd at the sale price of RM2,524,410.00.

[5] Shan a/l Theivanthiran ("Shan") who at the material time was an advocate and solicitor practicing as a partner in the firm of Messrs Thevin Chandran & Associates acted for the appellants and their two siblings in that sale transaction.

[6] On 2 May 2014, a cheque for the sum of RM2,145,748.50, being the balance purchase price, was forwarded by the purchaser's solicitors to Messrs Thevin Chandran & Associates. In due course, that cheque was cleared and payment was received by Messrs Thevin Chandran & Associates.

[7] Each of the four beneficiaries, including the appellants were to receive RM521,427.00 as their share of the balance purchase price. Shan then drew out two Public Bank Berhad cheques dated 17 March 2016 each for the sum of RM521,427.00 in the respective names of the appellants and gave them to the appellants. However, Shan subsequently notified the appellants not to cash the cheques until he notified them to do so.

Sign up to view full cases Login