Furthermore, section 30 of the LPA provides that unless an advocate and solicitoris practising, he shall not apply for a practising certificate. Therefore, due to the fact that a person is retired, logically, he would not own a certificate that is issued on a yearly basis by the Registrar. This is further strengthened in section 36 of the LPA which provides that no person shall practise as an advocate and solicitor unless he has a valid practising certificate. In the case of Badan Peguam Malaysia v Kerajaan Malaysia, the judge held that fr a person to be entitled to practise as an advoacte and solicitor, he must have a valid practising certificate before he can practise. Furthermore, in the case of Syed Mubarak v Majlis Peguam Negara, wherethe appellant was a public acountant and at the same time qualified to be a lawyer. Gopal Sri Ram JCA held that the object of the parliaent is to maintain high standards in the profession.
ANSWER SHEET Student ID 1161102265 Subject Code UCP4612 Section / Group L2 Lecturer Name MR. Azizie Page13 | 17 In the case of Mohd Najib Razak v PP, where the court acknowledged at para 44 that Gopal Sri Ram, though retired from judicial service, at all times, had remained a practising advocate and solicitor of the High Court. In conclusion, the absence of a yearly renewed practising certificate which indicates that a lawyer is still practising as per the laws under the LPA 1976 may be sufficient to dismiss the appointment of Datuk Thaddeus as the DPP for the case. QUESTION 3(c) There are several material differences between summons and warrant under the Crimnal Procedural Code. A “summons case”means a case relating to an offence and not being a warrant case while a “warrant case”means a case relating to an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for a term exceeding six months. These definitions when read together imply that when the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term up to six months with a fine only, that offence relates to a summons case. Relevant provisions in lieu of warrants are sections 38 to 43 of the CPC. These are some differences between summons and warrant. A summons is addressed to the person summoned, signifying that it is less serious in nature. A warrant is addressed to the police officer. A warrant case is more serious in nature. Furthermore, summons cases relate to offences punishable with less than six months imprisonment, while in a warrnatcase, it relates to offences punishable with imprisonment exceeding six months and th death sentence. For summons, a formal charge need not be framed, while the framing of a charge for a warrant case is highly important. Finally, in a summons case, the complainant can withdraw the case with the permission of the
ANSWER SHEET Student ID 1161102265 Subject Code UCP4612 Section / Group L2 Lecturer Name MR. Azizie Page14 | 17 court. In warrant cases, such a withdrawal is not allowed except in the case of compoundable offences.
ANSWER SHEET Student ID 1161102265 Subject Code UCP4612 Section / Group L2 Lecturer Name MR. Azizie Page15 | 17