09th May, 2017

Dear Members of the Bar,

Below is the Report of the Meeting with the Managing Judge Of the Civil High Court of Shah Alam held on 14th April 2017.

The meeting was chaired by YA Tan Sri Datuk Ramly bin Haji Ali FCJ ("Managing Judge") and it was attended by Judges and Deputy Registrars of the Civil Division of the Shah Alam High Court . The Selangor Bar Committee ("SBC") members that attended the meeting was comprised of Mr AG Kalidas, the Chairman, Mr Bernard Scott, Ms. Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo, Mr. Mishant Thiruchelvan, Ms. Sharon Palaniammal, Mr. Salim Bashir and Mr. KA Ramu, representing the Criminal Practice Sub-Committee Chairperson.

The issues raised by SBC were as follows:-

ISSUE NO.1: Parties are instructed to file separate orders for Decree Nisi and the other prayers in the Petition in the Shah Alam High Court. SBC received a number of complaints from members that it should be reverted to the old practice, that is, the Decree Nisi should incorporate all the prayers in the Petition to avoid additional cost to the client.

MJ was of the view that it should be in two separate orders as the ancillary orders may be subjected to variation in the future. However, MJ appreciates the concern of the members and agreed that all Courts should have a standard practice. MJ also agreed to raise the matter with POJ for further discussion and clarification.

ISSUE NO. 2: Mediation for family matters to be conducted by experts and requested for additional Family Courts in Shah Alam.

MJ agreed to look into whether further training can be provided for Judges mediating, handling or hearing Family matters and agreed to request POJ for more Family Courts in Shah Alam.

ISSUE NO. 3: Adjournment of cases in the High Court on the ground the lawyer has to attend to a matter in the Appellate Court.

MJ pointed out that there is no automatic adjournment in the High Court in the event a lawyer has a matter in the Appellate Court on the same day. However, MJ stressed that while there was no priority of Courts in respect of the issue of granting adjournments, the discretion to adjourn is left with the respective High Court Judge and an adjournment is normally given on a case by case basis.

ISSUE NO. 4: Case Management directions varies from one Case Management date to another. There have been instances where a matter came before the same Judge on two different Case Management dates but directions from the previous Case Management differs and conflicts with the subsequent Case Management. SBC requested that all directions be minuted and be reflected in the e-minutes.

MJ agreed that it should be the practice and requested the Judges to minute the directions in the e-minutes

ISSUE NO. 5: Lawyers are asked to withdraw Winding Up Petition and to file afresh under the New Companies Act 2016 ("the 2016 Act") when there is a saving provision in the Act.

MJ and the Judges stated that they do rely on the saving provisions in the 2016 Act for matters filed prior to any of the provisions in the 2016 Act coming into force and there is no need to file afresh.

Thank you.
A G Kalidas
Selangor Bar Committee


Events with CPD points