Monthly Archives: June 2016

LegalHack Series: How to download files from the Malaysian Court Online File Search System

[Note: This guide is not longer applicable as the Court has migrated to Phase 2]

One of the weaknesses of our Court’s efiling system is the online file search system. A user has to pay RM12 (for High Court and above) or RM6 (for Subordinate Courts) to be able to do an online file search for a maximum period of 30 minutes. The time runs upon opening a file on the website (at main page, under Public Services menu).

However, one cannot download a file from the website but one can only view it. The viewing function allows one to view one page at a time and also print one page at a time. Each page takes some time to load and 30 minutes is not sufficient.

This is baffling. Why can’t they put a function to allow users to download the entire file? This is what you get when you roll out a system without proper consultation with the end users.

In any event, to overcome this problem, I found a solution. Here are the steps:-

1. Download the free software PDF24 and install it on your PC.
2. Open the file you intend to download on the Online File Search System (login to the system first).

3. Choose PDF24 as the printer.

4. Every page will be printed as a separate file on PDF24. To merge them, click on the Merge button on top. All the pages will be merged into one file!

5. Save the file.
6. Repeat step 2 to 5 above for other files.

* Tip – Close the file on the search system to stop the timer.

Legal start-up’s services scrutinised by Malaysian Bar

I was quoted by The Star newspaper on the entry of Dragon Law, a Hong Kong based company providing access to legal documents and legal access, into Malaysia.

“Intellectual Property lawyer Foong Cheng Leong said it would be “interesting” to see what the Bar Council, especially its Legal Profession Committee, would do.

“Dragon Law says it will refer those who use the template to a qualified lawyer. But they have to be careful as it may amount to touting for such lawyers,” he said.

To elaborate further, s. 37(3) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (LPA) which prohibits touting for law firms. S37(3) of the LPA provides the following:-

(3) Any unauthorized person who offers or agrees to place at the disposal of any other person the services of an advocate and solicitor shall be guilty of an offence under this subsection:

Provided that this subsection shall not apply to any person who offers or agrees to place at the disposal of any other person the services of an advocate and solicitor pursuant to a lawful contract of indemnity or insurance.

The Malaysian Bar is entitled to file an injunction against any person who contravenes s. 37 of the LPA and this was confirmed recently by the Federal Court in Bar Malaysia v. Index Continent Sdn Bhd [2016] 2 CLJ 545.

BFM Podcast: WEB OF EXPLOITATION

I was interviewed BFM Radio on the issue of sexual grooming and sex offenders registry and the podcast was published on 8 June 2016.


Your browser does not support native audio, but you can download this MP3 to listen on your device.

The rise of pedophilia and other sex offences recently have put in the spotlight predatory behaviour both on and offline. Today we look at how the lack of proper regulation is one source of the challenge. We also explore ways to combat online sexual predators.

This report is by Wan Irdina.

Don’t be penny-wise, startups: lawyers

I gave on a talk on Intellectual Property Law for Startup at a firechat sessions titled “Bridge the Gap between Startups and the Law” organised by BurgieLaw held at the Malaysian Global Innovation and Creativity Centre (MaGIC) on 9 May 2016.

Subsequent to the firechat session, I was featured in The Star in their article “Don’t be penny-wise, startups: lawyers“. An extract of the article produce below:-

Intellectual Property lawyer Foong Cheng Leong said he often got queries from startups on how to protect their ideas.

“It’s usually quite reasonable, but sometimes they try to protect things that can’t be protected,” he said, adding that abstract ideas and business concepts could not be shielded with a patent.

He advised companies to research what they expected from a lawyer, as well as the lawyer’s credentials, before arranging a meeting. This would ensure the lawyer had the correct skill sets.

He noted that many local lawyers were geared to common transactions like property and sale and purchase agreements, and not many had explored tech-related laws.

With 11 years in the industry, Foong said he had seen his share of cases where businesses try to D-I-Y and drafted their contracts without going to a lawyer, only to end up going to a lawyer anyway after things went wrong.

He said while filing a trademark costs around from RM2,000, going to court over a logo or brand name dispute could easily cost more than RM100,000 and take between nine months and a year.

Sometimes running lean also means not being penny-wise and pound-foolish.

 Scroll to top