Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©New Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Brenda Lim

More lawyers, but where’s the quality? And why is the legal profession in this state?

IPOH: The number of lawyers may be going up, but their calibre is apparently not.

This indictment of the deteriorating quality of learned counsel came from High Court judge Datuk V.T. Singham.

"The court regretfully notes that many who come before this court are not very serious in carrying out their duties," he said yesterday.

While presiding over three separate cases, he highlighted concerns over lawyers who failed to address the court, who repeatedly submitted affidavits to correct themselves and who presented inadequate submissions, resulting in judges having to do their own research.

"It is a rare occasion that I hear ‘May it please Your Lordship’," he said, pointing out that some lawyers did not even bother to address the court to introduce themselves or their opposing counsel before proceeding with a case.

Such incidents did not reflect well on the legal profession, he said, urging the Bar Council to look into factors causing the deterioration of the quality and competence of lawyers so that the integrity of lawyers could be maintained.

When admitting chambering students Naziatul Azrin Faizal, 25, and Nisa Hairani Nek Man, 26, to the Bar yesterday, Singham advised them to study and adhere to all that was contained in the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978.

He also stressed the importance of integrity, adding that lawyers lose public confidence when they do not maintain their integrity.

Later, when approving an application for short call to the Bar, Singham pointed out that the past three years saw almost all of such applications to his court being corrected by affidavits after affidavits, even though the process involved filling up a simple form.

A short call gives chambering students limited right of audience to appear before the court in chambers.

The judge said it was the duty of the master, under whom a pupil was chambering, to check before filing an application, and not to file it, wait for someone to point out the mistakes and then correct it.

The judge asked if it was fair for the master’s pupil (the chambering student) to wait for a long time before being allowed to appear before the court in chambers, due to delays caused by papers not being in order.

In the case before Singham, a third corrective affidavit was being submitted to support the application for chambering student Mohd Khairul Fairuz Rahman’s short call, involving an omission on the date he began chambering.

Khairul’s master, Syed Fadzil Syed Shamsuddin, was not present in court to show support, unlike the usual practice of most lawyers acting as masters to chambering students.

Perak Bar Committee member Lai Choe Ken said the Bar Council was taking steps to streamline the applications.

Replying to a question by the judge, Lai said he could not produce any application for short call in the past three years that was free of corrective affidavits or explain why this was so.

Meanwhile, Singham pointed out to counsel A. Selvanathan and Lee Pooi Mun that he had to conduct his own research as their submissions on an application for entering further evidence in a civil suit, were inadequate.

Selvanathan was representing plaintiff Kay Synergy Sdn Bhd in an appeal against a Sessions Court decision which had dismissed its claims for RM248,526.50 with interests from Malayan Banking Bhd over quit rent arrears paid to the Kinta land and district office. The hearing continues on July 9.

Comments (4)

Subscribe to this comment's feed