Luqman's musings

  Lawyers are duty-bound to represent their clients. But they are also officers of the court, sworn to uphold justice. What happens when those duties collide — when a lawyer continues to act despite clear contradictions and even evidence of fraud?

In my last post, I shared the disciplinary complaint lodged against a serving teacher who has defied a High Court order and remains in financial indebtedness . That letter was not written lightly. It was written because the law is clear, and yet enforcement has been selective.

  Yesterday I wrote about how law and justice are not the same. Today, I want to show how that gap plays out in real life. A High Court order was made — compensation of RM3,000 was awarded. Yet the judgment sits unenforced, because plaintiffs must pay lawyers for every letter, every application, every procedural step.

  The recent Court of Appeal decision affirming a RM4.8 million judgment against Sime Darby Property for defective bungalows in the Primo Bukit Jelutong development marks an important moment for property buyers in Malaysia. This case, reported by Free Malaysia Today on January 30, 2026, involved six homeowners who sued the developer (and its predecessor) over breaches of sale and purchase agreements related to poor workmanship and substandard materials. The High Court initially ruled in their favour in April 2024, awarding damages plus interest and costs, after rejecting defences such as owner-induced damage, wear and tear, or "as-is" purchases. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the developer's appeal, finding no merit in the arguments and ordering additional costs to the owners. LINK