Sabahan sues bank for appointing peninsular lawyers
This article is for general informational purposes only and is not meant to be used or construed as legal advice in any manner whatsoever. All articles have been scrutinized by a practicing lawyer to ensure accuracy.
Senior Sabah lawyer Marcel Jude Joseph, 54, initiated the suit after he received two letters of demand from Messrs A..... & W..... in connection with a loan facility.
Senior Sabah lawyer Marcel Jude Joseph, 54, (right) has filed a suit against......... Bank Berhad, where he has an account, for appointing three peninsula-based lawyers to handle its case against him. Marcel claims that the bank did not get the blessing of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak before appointing the three lawyers.
The senior lawyer named........ Bank as the first defendant and the three lawyers – AB, BC and CD – as the second defendants. The three lawyers are with Messrs AB & C , Advocates & Solicitors, Kuala Lumpur.
Marcel initiated the suit after he received two letters of demand from Messrs AB & C requesting payment of arrears of installment of RM4,049.00, compensation charges of RM272.86 and legal cost of RM37.10 (inclusive GST) in connection with a loan facility. “What business has a legal firm and lawyers who have no right to practise in the State of Sabah to issue a letter to me?” he asked. “This clearly contravenes the provision of the Advocates Ordinance of Sabah.”
He argued that the bank/legal firm have not provided him with any service and yet was trying to claim GST from him. “This is tantamount to fraud.”
“Am I the only one or are there others like me asked to pay up GST?”
He disclosed that he had extended copies of the letters from the legal firm to the Inquiry Committee of the Sabah Law Association (SLA), the Deputy Registrar of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak in Kota Kinabalu and the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak based in Kuching, “for their verification and investigation”.
In his statement of claim, the Sabahan is seeking exemplary damages from the bank and the three peninsular lawyers.
Marcel claims that the bank’s contention that his loan was in arrears was false and untrue. “This has caused me much distress and mental trauma.”
He further claims that the letter of demand to him was unlawful and in breach of the term loan facility between him and the first defendant.
He wants an injunction retraining the first and second defendants on the letter of demand and further claims damages to be assessed, statutory interest, costs and any other relief deemed fit by the Court.