The Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) and its disciplinary committee (DC) have succeeded in their appeal to reinstate former Damansara MP Tony Pua’s complaint over the audit of 1MDB’s financial statements.
In virtual proceedings, the Court of Appeal this morning allowed the appeal over Pua’s complaint, which is linked to MIA and the DC’s disciplinary proceedings against Deloitte PLT partner Ng Yee Hong.
Pua previously lodged a complaint (Complaint 25) with MIA on May 26, 2015, over the audit signed off by Ng over 1MDB’s financial accounts between 2013 and 2014.
However, earlier on March 31, 2015, one Andrew Anand Solomon Devasahayam had also lodged a complaint (Complaint 23) with MIA over Ng’s professional conduct as auditor for 1MDB.
Ng had claimed that Pua’s complaint ought to be struck out as the committee had already taken action on Solomon’s complaint.
With today’s unanimous three-person Court of Appeal ruling, the DC can proceed with hearing the disciplinary proceedings against Ng based on Pua’s complaint.
Judge Azizah Nawawi chairing the appellate bench ruled that the Kuala Lumpur High Court had committed an appellable error in allowing Ng’s judicial review to strike out Pua’s complaint.
The panel, also comprising judges See Mee Chun and Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, pointed out that the DC then was ready to proceed with hearing both of Solomon and Pua’s complaints, but that it was Ng’s then legal team who sought Pua’s complaint hearing to be deferred, and the DC had allowed the deferment.
“As such, it does not lie in the mouth of the respondent (Ng) to now complain that since Complaint 23 has been completed, Complaint 25 is now res judicata,” the panel said.
Procedural impropriety
Res judicata is a legal doctrine meant to stop the relitigation of hearings between the same parties.
The appellate bench ordered Ng to pay RM20,000 in costs to each appellant.
MIA and the DC were appealing against the Kuala Lumpur High Court decision on April 5, 2022, which allowed Ng’s judicial review to quash the committee’s decision not to strike out Pua’s complaint.
On that date, High Court judge Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh ruled that the DC’s decision was “tainted with procedural impropriety”.
On March 31 and May 26, 2015, two complaints were lodged against Ng by Solomon and Pua respectively, with the MIA.
The complaints were concerning the professional conduct of Ng as an auditor of 1MDB for the financial years ending 2013 and 2014.
The investigation committee then initiated the investigations into both complaints.
Ng had submitted written explanations in respect of Complaint 23 and Complaint 25 to the committee on June 19 and July 7, 2015, respectively, and Ng had also attended a hearing on both complaints on March 30, 2017.
On Sept 28, 2017, the IC issued separate reports regarding each complaint.
Based on the two separate reports, the committee had proposed three distinct charges to be proffered against Ng on Complaint 23, and three other charges under Complaint 25.
Following a hearing in 2020, the DC found the allegations in Complaint 23 proven and ordered Ng suspended for two years and imposed a RM5,000 fine.
The Disciplinary Appeal Board affirmed the DC’s finding, leading to Ng filing a judicial review at the civil court to challenge this.
However, on Dec 9, 2021, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed Ng’s judicial review linked to Solomon's complaint. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.