Hakim tolak cubaan bekas majikan halang kemasukan peguam ke Badan Peguam

The High Court of Kuala Terengganu ruled that the court was not the appropriate forum for a personal grievance and that the process of joining the legal profession was not a tool for a former employer to seek an apology. The former employer, identified as B, failed to submit a formal caveat or comply with the procedures under the Legal Profession Act 1976.

B, who is both a litigation and counseling lawyer, sent an email to the Legal Profession Board a day before the hearing, attaching a screenshot of a WhatsApp conversation allegedly made between August and September. In the message, B was accused of making false and defamatory statements, tarnishing the firm's reputation and potentially preventing other junior lawyers from joining the firm.

B claimed the allegations were false and slanderous, damaging the firm's reputation and could prevent other junior lawyers from joining. He may have initiated defamation proceedings. However, the public prosecutor, the Legal Profession Board, and the Terengganu Bar Council did not raise any objection to the petition. Yusrin noted that Sections 16 and 17 of the Legal Profession Act 1976 provide for special procedures for objections, including the submission of a caveat by an individual.

The email sent to the Legal Profession Board a day before the hearing, while containing the WhatsApp screenshot, was not considered a formal objection under Sections 16 or 17. Yusrin also criticized the action of escalating the matter during the hearing for the application for admission to the Legal Profession Board, and emphasized that it should not be used to resolve personal disputes.

The court is not a forum for resolving personal grievances and the process of joining the Legal Profession Board is not a tool for a former employer to force someone to apologize, the judgment stated in a 14-page order. In essence, the petition, while true, is not sufficient to prevent the individual identified as A from joining the professional legal firm.

B meets the standards of good character in the petition and is found to be fit to practice law, and the court has approved the petition and directed the registrant to register B as a litigation and counseling lawyer at the High Court of Malaya.