UPP4612_Professional Practice I _2018/2019 _Tri 1

Question 1

Rosy has just obtained an LL. B (Hons) degree from Multimedia University. She intends to practice law. She
consults you, a practising advocate and solicitor, for advice before she starts her pupillage.

a) What are the requirements for admission as an advocate and solicitor? Advise Rosy as to the qualifications
and requirements for admission.
(10 marks)

b) Under the Legal Profession Act 1976, only an advocate and solicitor holding a valid current practising
certificate has the right of audience in the court. The Act however provides for a form of restricted audience.
Discuss the relevant provisions of the Act and how the application is made. (10 marks)

Question 2

Jerald is an ambitious young lawyer who has set up his own practice a year after being admitted as an
Advocates & Solicitors. The firm’s named is Jerald & Co. After a year focusing on criminal litigation and some
conveyancing files, he feels that his income as a lawyer is not sufficient to maintain his luxurious lifestyle. He
then decided to venture into a new business that is selling apparel. This idea was shared between him and
his two staff, Ms. Lim & Ms. Gina.

Due to his busy scheduled and both the staff also need to attend to the office works, they decided to carry
on the business of selling apparel in the law firm itself. The apparel was sold to each and every client that
come to the firm. This business helps him much in increasing his income.

Jerald was busy focusing on this apparel business and in one case, he failed to reveal important documents
to the Court during trials. In another situation, his best friend’s cousin, Mr. Ong, the Plaintiff in a negligence
case, had retained his firm, Jerald & Co., to act for him. The case had been fixed for hearing on 10 July 2018
and Mr. Ong had paid Jerald the full fee but Jerald failed to attend the Court on the hearing date. The reason
given by him is he forgot that he had he had a hearing in another Court that same date and that case turn to
be more important than Ong’s case as the case was a criminal appeal at the Court of Appeal, Putrajaya.

Despite that, Jerald did not do anything to get a postponement from the Court for Mr. Ong’s case. He failed
to inform Mr. Ong and the Court about the matter. Therefore, Mr. Ong was not present and the Judge
dismissed the case with costs.

In addition, Jerald also told Ms. Gina, that since she is very committed, he intends to share all profits of legal
practice with her. Jerald was aware that Ms. Gina is not a qualified person. However, he considered this as
his business strategy to make sure that Ms. Gina will stay as an employee of the firm.

Discuss the ethical issues arising from the above facts with particular reference to the Legal Profession Act
1976 and the relevant Rules applicable thereunder. (25 marks)