PERTENTANGAN KEPENTINGAN

MINGGU 5
What is…
Perkara yang mempengaruhi peguam, serta secara negetif boleh menjejaskan
anak guam dan bentuk nasihat yang akan disampaikan oleh peguam.

Ringkasnya, ini berbentuk kepentingan peribadi dalam perkara-perkara

berkaitan yang mengaburi pertimbagan peguam dalam mempertahankan
kepentingan anakguamnya

Adalah menjadi kewajiban dari sudut etika kepada peguam untuk

memaklumkan kepada anak guam mengenai kepentingan dalam perkara dan
tidak menerima apa-apa perlantikan yang dia mempunyai kepentingan.
Interests that would be likely
to affect adversely the
lawyer’s judgment or advice
on behalf of, or loyalty to, a
client or prospective client.
C O D E O F P R O F E S S I O N A L C O N D U C T, C A N A D A B A R A S S O C I AT I O N , C H P V
Asas Tegahan
Hubungan yang berasaskan fidusiari.

Peguam mesti meletakkan keutamaan kepada kebajikan anakguam dan mengelakkan dari bertindak dalam keadaan
yang menimbulkan ketaatan kepada anakguam dikompromi.

Contoh: Peguam menerima tugasan dari anakguam untuk menyempurnakan jualbeli dan pindahmilik tanah, dan
dalam masa yang sama menerima tugasan dari penjual tanah. Peguam tidak mendedahkan perkara ini dan semasa
transaksi telah menyebabkan proses pindahmilik tanah mengalami kelewatan sehingga merugikan anakguam
(pembeli tanah); dalam masa yang sama menerima faedah dan penjual berikutan kelewatan proe tersebut
disempurnakan.
JENIS-JENIS KEPENTINGAN
Rule 27. Advocate and solicitor not to
appear where pecuniarily interested

(a) An advocate and (b) This rule does not

solicitor shall not apply to the case of an
appear in any matter in advocate and solicitor
which he is directly appearing himself to
pecuniarily interested. tax his own costs.
KEWANGAN
Tetuan Kumar Jaspal Quah & Aishah v Far
Legion Sdn Bhd & Ors [2007] 3 MLJ 305
• Perayu (App) • Peguam baru yang JK
• Tuntut untuk dapatkan bayaran mohon utk gugurkan
perkidmatan dr MCO • MCW beri akujanji
membuat bayaran
perkhidmatan JK

JK MCW

Yuran
perkhidmatan
bukanlah
Far Legion
merupakan
kepentingan
kewangan
• Respondent
• Anak guam JK, kemudian lantik
MCW menggantikan KJ
Vijayalakshmi Devi Nadchatiram v Saraswathy
Devi Nadchatiram [2000] 4 CLJ 870.

Maksud kepentingan kewangan, tidak meliputi fee profesional.

Maksud r 27 ‘in a scenario where a beneficiary son/daughter cum solicitor represents the
estate of the deceased in a legal tussle. In that hypothetical scenario that advocates, and
solicitors has a direct pecuniary interest, as that interest which has monetary value or
money’s worth is tied down directly to the dispute estate and not confined to fix
professional fee.’
Kepentingan Peribadi & Kewangan
RS MUTHIAH v PEMBINAAN FIBA SDN BHD [2004] 4 MLJ 78; [2004] 2 CLJ 917  
Peguam (Maliga) mewakili Plaintif adalah isteri kepada MD syarikat yang merupakan defendant.
Adakah ini terjumlah kepada percanggahan kepentingan peribadi & kewangan?
In my judgment, Puan Malliga certainly has a personal relationship with Mr. Balachandran a/l Kandasamy and is
thereby prohibited by r. 3 of the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 from acting for the
defendant in the proceedings.
The fact that Pn Malliga was a secretary to the defendant company and might have a pecuniary interest in this case
must be taken into consideration. Rule 27(a) of the Legal Profession (Practice & Etiquette) Rules 1978 clearly spells
out that an advocate and solicitor shall not ppear in any matter in which he has a direct pecuniary interest .
Vijayalakshmi Devi Nadchatiram
The objective of the provision lies in the fact that the Bar had set a high standard of practice. The Bar requires that an advocate and
solicitor must be able to give an objective and independent judgment before he embarks on the task of advising a client. Thus the
advocate and solicitor would not be in a position to do so if he is bound by ties of personal relationship to his client and tied by
pecuniary interest . The mischief to be cured and the intention of the Rules are too clear to be ignored. The provisions are too clear to
admit of any doubt or dispute. They had been so framed to preserve the integrity of an advocate and solicitor so that he may not be in
conflict of interest and by the same token ensures that when he acts for a client he is independent and free vis-a-visboth when
representing the client and performing his duty as an officer of the court in which he appeared.

the blood relationship between the defendant and the litigants is so closely connected that the defendant's duty to the Court becomes
subordinate to her obligation to her client or is otherwise marred by her personal feelings for one party against the other thereby putting
her personal interests over her head and her duty to Court under her feet. The Court must not allow it.
Peguam dan pihak-pihak dalam tuntutan adalah adik beradik
The parties to all the actions are the siblings of Nadchatiram, most of
whom are advocates and solicitors. Properties worth millions of Ringgit are
at stake. The siblings bite not at the fruits of their father's labour but they
gnaw at each others flesh and blood.
the blood relationship between the defendant and the litigants is so closely
connected that the defendant's duty to the Court becomes subordinate to her
obligation to her client or is otherwise marred by her personal feelings for one
party against the other thereby putting her personal interests over her head
and her duty to Court under her feet. The Court must not allow it.
Maksud hubungan peribadi
Vijayalakshmi Devi Nadchatiram

What does come within the ambit of "personal relationship"? By its ordinary Concise Oxford Dictionary's
meaning of relationship is "the fact or state of being related" and "personal" is relating to or connected
with the person. Or to take the meaning of "relation" in the Jowitt's Dictionary of English Law it means"
a general word meaning prima facie next of kin of any degree or colloquially, kindred of all degrees.
personal relationship between a solicitor and his client can only mean a relationship (meaning an
association) which is personal between them. A working relationship between partners of a firm is not a
personal relationship, so that a lawyer can always act for his firm. A sexual relationship between two
people is a personal relationship. But a solicitor and client relationship is not a personal relationship.
However, there would be a personal relationship between them if their association is something which is
more than that of a professional one.
Larangan mewakili pihak yang ditentang sebelumnya
TAN KIM HOR & ORS V. TAN HENG CHEW &ORS [2004] 6 CLJ 338

I am satisfied that the firm is not in possession of any information, confidential or

otherwise, as alleged by the respondents, which the firm is capable of using against the
respondents in this petition. The respondents' only complaint is that the firm's corporate
department had previously advised TCC in certain corporate matters and in its
participation of the demerger exercise of TCMH. I am of the view that the respondents
assumptions of any conflict of interest and confidentiality are seriously misconceived.
These allegations are far-fetched and have been credibly responded to by the petitioners.
The partners of the corporate department in the firm have confirmed that during their
retainer by TCC, neither the petitioners nor the respondents had confided information,
confidential or otherwise, to the firm which are relevant or material to this petition. Their
scope of advice to TCC was confined to the company only and not to the individual
shareholders
Bertindak bagi pelbagai pihak dalam
tuntutan yang sama
CHE AHMAD HJ CHE DAUD & ORS V. DCB BANK BHD [2001] 5 CLJ 333
Firma guaman yang sama menyediakan dokumen kemudahan overdraft
mewakili bank dan juga bertindak bagi pihak respondent dalam
permohonan bantahan penghakiman ingkar diperolehi secara tidak sah.

It is clear that the rule [r5(a)]prohibits a counsel to act for all the parties in a
case. Obviously there is a conflict of interest , and the counsel is not able
to maintain professional independence and it is not in the best interest of
the administration of justice.
Ng Siew Lan v John Lee Tsun Vui
& Anor [2017] 2 MLJ 167
Peguambela (Def 1 & 2) tidak mendedahkan bahawa, sementara masih bertindak bagi pihak
plaintif, mereka turut bertindak bagi pihak sebuah syarikat dikenali sebagai NCT Forwarding &
Shipping (Sabah) Sdn Bhd (‘NCT’) yang turut berhasrat untuk membeli tanah yang sama.

Defendan pertama dan kedua telah bertindak bagi pihak NCT pada masa yang masa mereka
masih bertindak bagi pihak plaintif; mereka telah meletakkan diri mereka dalam situasi
percanggahan kepentingan. Tidak terdapat justifikasi yang wajar untuk mengkompromi
kepentingan plaintif dan mengkhianati kepercayaan plaintif.

Mereka tidak sewajarnya berkhidmat kepada dua tuan pada masa yang sama!
Rule 28. Advocate and solicitor not to
appear in a case where he is a witness.
(a) An advocate and solicitor shall not appear in Court or in Chambers in any case in which he has reason to
believe that he will be a witness in respect of a material and disputed question of fact, and if while appearing
in a case it becomes apparent that he will be such a witness, he shall not continue to appear if he can retire
without jeopardising his client's interests.

(b) An advocate and solicitor shall not appear before an appellate tribunal if in the case under appeal he has
been a witness on a material and disputed question of fact in the Court below.

(c) These rule does not prevent an advocate and solicitor from swearing or affirming an affidavit as to formal
or undisputed facts in matters in which he acts or appears.
Perkara-perkara lain yang boleh menimbulkan tuduhan terdapat
pertentangan kepentingan

Apabila ahli kepada firma yang mewakili adalah pihak dalam tuntutan atau akan
menjadi saksi dalam tuntutan. Lee Kam Sun v Ho Sau Lin & Anor 1999] 4 CLJ 507;

Perlakuan ini tidak dibenarkan disebabkan ‘interest of justice’ memerlukan

jaminan ‘the fair and orderly conduct of the trial’. Ini mungkin melibatkan
menghalang peguam dari bertindak bagi pihak anakguamnya.
Public Prosecutor v Vengadasalam
& Ors [1990] 1 MLJ 507
Walaupun Perlembagaan menjamin hak representasi oleh peguam yang dipilih; namun boleh
dibataskan jika menganggu perbicaraan;

It is undesirable for an advocate to appear as a counsel in a trial when he is required to be a material

witness. If an advocate, knowing that he is going to be a material witness, insists on appearing as
counsel in the case, the presiding court has the jurisdiction to take the appropriate action in the interest
of justice to ensure the fair and orderly conduct of the trial. In the present case, the magistrate,
therefore, had the jurisdiction to make an order restraining Mr Annamalai from acting for the accused
persons.

Dakwaan bahawa Peguam Def akan dipanggil sebagai saksi walaubagaimanapun perlu dibuktikan.
Rule 29. Advocate and solicitor
not to testify on behalf of client.

Except when essential to the ends of justice or

as to merely formal matters, and advocate and
solicitor appearing in any cause shall not
testify in Court on behalf of his client only in
that cause.
SYKT PENGANGKUTAN SAKTI SDN BHD v
TAN JOO KHING T/A BENGKEL SEN TAK
[1997] 5 MLJ 705

What would happen if Mr Gana Muthusamy is called upon to give evidence in the witness box?
Surely, he would be embarrassed as he could not cross-examine himself, nor can he address the court
as to the credibility of his own testimony. As counsel for the plaintiff, Mr Gana Muthusamy would be
seriously handicapped in representing his client's interests. That would not be fair to his client. In that
situation, this court feels that justice will not be done if Mr Gana Muthusamy represents the plaintiff.
As I said earlier, the relationship of a solicitor and his client is confidential in nature. The client trusts
his solicitor confidentially and personally entrusts his solicitor to do certain things. It follows that what
is entrusted to the solicitor must be done by that solicitor and may not be delegated
When Mr Gana Muthusamy visited the defendant's workshop and spoke to Tan Joo Khing, he became
a witness on these material and disputed questions of facts. By virtue of r 28(a) of the Legal Profession
(Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978, Mr Gana Muthusamy should be barred from representing the
plaintiff be it in open court or in chambers. There are no concessions to be offered. The rules must be
complied with for an orderly conduct of litigation and to maintain and observe the standard of conduct
required of members of this august profession. The courts have an inherent power and authority to
refuse to permit a particular advocate and solicitor from appearing on behalf of a particular individual
in a particular case. Faced with this sanction, it would be a gross misconduct on the part of that
particular advocate and solicitor to so appear. The right of a particular individual to be represented by
an advocate and solicitor of his own choice is not absolute. It is the court that will determine that right.
An advocate and solicitor
shall not stand as a surety or
bailor for his client required
for the purpose of any legal
proceedings.
RULE 40. ADVOCATE AND SOLICITOR NOT TO STAND SURETY.
KALSOMBI BINTI V.K.MAJID (NRIC
No: 460703-02-5130) v SAHLAN BIN
SARUDDIN (mengamal dibawah
nama Tetuan Sahlan & Associates)
AND ANOR [2010] MLJU 1530
……
“It’s one small step for man, one
giant leap for mankind.”

- NEIL ARMSTRONG