website statistics
feed
Home arrow Bar Forum
Advertisement
Malaysian Bar Forum  


Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/06/26 11:31 I would like to highlight the recent letter from the Chief registrar in Circular 155/2008.

I find the directive to be an insult to the integrity of the bar. Why is that when the Stamp duty department is willing to accept our cheques worth a few thousand ringgit, the Courts is not willing to do the same? Forgive my ignorant but how often do they encounter bounced cheque from lawyers? Isnt it a rule that we have to honour each and every cheque we issue if we do not want to be faced with disciplinary action?

Just imagine the scenario when we have to buy money order or postal order from the Post Office. First we have to withdraw cash from the bank (dont forget the RM2 charge), then we will have to go to the post office to purchase the money order and postal order (dont forget the commission), then finally go to court to make payments.

So....please, Office Bearers, do something abt this. We are an honourable profession, defend our integrity. "Jgn sampai org kata cek lawyer tak laku!"
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/06/26 14:01 The circular you refer to did say that the Bar Council "will have discussions" with the Chief Registrar about this new directive. I suppose we wait for an update from the Bar Council about the outcome of those discussions.
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/07/02 12:42 I agree with you, Yusnida - it is an insult to the integrity of the Bar to prevent lawyers from using cheques for filing. I presume that the reason for the directive may have been the dishonour of cheques issued by some legal firms, but just because of a few bad apples, does that justify rejecting cheques from all legal firms in this country?

My firm uses cheques to file summones and other court documents, and this can sometimes amount to over RM1,000.00 (Sessions Court Summons RM100, High Court Writ etc. RM200). To now reject the use of cheques would mean we would have to have ready cash of substantial amounts at all times in my office. Alternatively each time my office boy does filing, he goes to the bank to withdraw money, then goes to the post office to buy postal orders for outstation filing, and then goes to the court for filing documents locally while carrying loads of cash. What happens if he is waylaid along the way in spite of our super-safe streets (where no snatch thefts have ever occurred)? I cannot ask my clients for payment again, so naturally I would have to fork out the money myself and hope in vain for our insurance to cover the loss.

Sometimes I wish more thought would go into decisions made at the top. If there are instances of bad hats amongst us with dishonoured cheques, punish them alone instead of the rest of the legal profession.

Jaspal Singh Gill
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/07/07 12:15 Dear All,

The Bar Council appreciates the concerns that members have raised in respect of this new directive. I will be meeting the Chief Registrar on 9th July 2009 to discuss this matter. Will keep members posted on the outcome of the said meeting.

George Varughese
Treasurer
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/07/09 12:57 Dear All,

At the meeting with the Chief Registrar this morning, it was agreed that payments by cheque will continue to be accepted and as such the directive will not be enforced from 15th July 2008. A circular with more details will be issued later today.

George Varughese
Treasurer
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Re:Usage of wang pos/bankdraft for payment to Court - 2008/07/10 11:24 My dear George

I thank you sincerely for your efforts in getting the authorities, including the Courts, to accept lawyer's cheques in their many transactions with them.

It would appear that this reprieve would be subject to how positively lawyers respond to the situation in the forseeable future.

For one, unless there is cogent cause such as a genuinely human oversight, lawyers should never allow their cheques to bounce.

Even then, it is for the authorities concerned to take up the matter with the Bar Council so that such cases can be referred to the Disciplinary Board for appropriate action.

The proposed imposition of the rule, if implemented on July 15, would have led to the unnecessary increase in the cost of conducting business in Malaysia, thus blunting our nation's ability to attract foreign investments.

This would have been most unfortunate, coming as it does against the background of fierce competition posed by countries such as China, India, Indonesia and Cambodia - Vietnam is having some grave financial problems at the moment.

It is my hope that just because of a few offenders within the 13,000-strong Malaysian Bar, the authorities concerned would not punish the overwhelming majority.

If this comes to pass, George, the punishment is far graver than the offence.

I am sure my lawyer friends would join me in asking you to kindly convey the Malaysian Bar's thanks to the Chief Registrar for his kind gesture.
  | | The administrator has disabled public write access.


Please abide by the Forum Rules at all times.
Username Password
Remember Me | Register | Lost Password?

Q & A with Razak



View Full Calendar