Luqman's musings

                                                                   🚫 Lawyers and False Documents: Integrity Is Non ‑ Negotiable Imagine this: A client slides an affidavit across the desk and says, “Just file this — no one will know.” The lawyer spots the falsehood immediately. At that moment, the choice is stark: comply and risk professional ruin, or uphold the duty to the court and refuse.

  Visit my store at :    https://payhip.com/LuqmanMichel     This post discusses general legal principles and case law for public education. It does not allege misconduct by any specific individual or party. All examples are illustrative only, and factual determinations remain the responsibility of the courts. Part 2: Subsale Particulars and Counterclaims 📌 The Role of Subsales In property disputes, subsale transaction files are often produced to challenge valuations. For credibility, subsales must reflect current transactions, not those from 5–6 years ago. Outdated or fabricated entries distort market value and undermine trust.

    Visit my store at :    https://payhip.com/LuqmanMichel                                                       This post discusses general legal principles and case law for public education. It does not allege misconduct by any specific individual or party. All examples are illustrative only, and factual determinations remain the responsibility of the courts.   🧾 Blog Series: Deceit, Counterclaims, and Subsale Particulars Part 1: Case Law Foundations — Panatron and Tong Chen

                                                              Blog Series on Fabricating False Evidence and Procedural Barriers   📑 Case Study: My Police Report On 15 October 2020, I lodged a police report at IPD Kota Kinabalu . The report detailed offences under the Penal Code , including:

                                                               “This is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.”   📚 Case Overview: Panatron Pte Ltd v Lee Cheow Lee [2001] SGCA 49 Court: Singapore Court of Appeal Date: 4 July 2001 Coram: Yong Pung How CJ, L P Thean JA , Chao Hick Tin JA   ⚖ ️ Facts   Panatron Pte Ltd sought investment from two individuals (Lee and Yin).

  “This is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.” ✍️ Educational Takeaway from this post Even if a defendant is unemployed, the withdrawal of a frivolous counterclaim does not erase the harm suffered. The law recognizes that litigation itself can be a weapon , and damages may be awarded to restore dignity, cover costs, and deter future abuse. 🏛 ️ Case Spotlight: Tong Chen [2011] SGHC 27 — Damages in Deceit Justice Judith Prakash’s decision in Tong Chen is a landmark reminder of how the law treats fraud differently from contract or negligence. The High Court of Singapore drew a sharp line: when deceit is proven, the damages are not about enforcing bargains or compensating careless mistakes — they are about stripping away the harm caused by lies.

  Blog Series on Fabricating False Evidence and Procedural Barriers Post 3:    ⚖ ️ Introduction When Malaysians lodge police reports , they expect criminal wrongdoing to be investigated. Yet, many complainants encounter a familiar barrier: reports are dismissed with phrases like “this is for the court” or “this is a civil matter.” My own experience illustrates this vividly. I filed a police report against an engineer involving false evidence and misrepresentation — clear criminal elements under the Penal Code . Instead of investigating, PDRM told me to refer the matter to KPKT . I complied, but no reply ever came, even after a reminder.

   I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Consult your lawyer for legal advice. ⚖ ️ Legal Case – The Cost of Frivolous Litigation in Sabah In our previous post , we explored how a party may “ win the battle but lose the war .” Today, we turn to a critical feature of Sabah’s civil litigation system : the English rule (“loser pays”), which ensures that the losing party bears the successful party’s reasonable legal costs. This principle applies uniformly across Malaysia, including the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak , and is designed to balance access to justice with deterrence against abuse.