KUALA LUMPUR – Former law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has filed a civil suit against his former law firm Zaid Ibrahim & Co to stop using his name.
Based on court documents obtained by The Vibes, Zaid filed a writ of summons on November 18 against the firm he founded.
The statement of claim attached to the writ stated that Zaid formed the law firm as the sole proprietor in 1987 and later expanded his business with salaried partners that included Chew Seng Kok and Nik Norzrul Thani.
During the expansion period, Zaid told the court that he “acquired substantial goodwill in obtaining empanelment with financial institutions and government-linked companies”.
In 2008, Zaid disengaged with his law practice to enter the federal cabinet as a minister, leaving his business in the hands of Chew and Nik Norzrul.
In 2018, Zaid said he intended to reenter the law practice and requested the firm refrain from using his name, which would allow him to begin a new practice with his name.
In an email dated July 1, 2019, from Zaid to Chew and Nik Norzrul, Zaid wrote the following: “... it’s opportune you tell me about my position in the firm. When I left in 2008, I had 30% equity held by Chew or his nominee. Similarly, I had shares in Zico Holding, although I do not know, until today, how many number of shares that I have.
“As you well know, my financial situation is dire and I need to resolve these matters to safeguard the livelihood of my family. I need to know how much is due to me and when exactly will I get paid.”
Chew and Nik Norzrul, however, instead invited Zaid to return as chairman and existing equity partner, which Zaid accepted.
Just one week later, Zaid said he was unlawfully terminated from the firm for “unauthorised acts done unilaterally”.
A letter signed by Kok dated November 12 and titled “Letter of engagement as advisor – notice of termination” referred to the fact that Zaid was engaged as an “advisor” and said: “We hereby give you our notice to terminate the engagement with immediate effect on November 12, 2020.
“In lieu of the one-month’s notice period required in the letter of engagement, we agree to pay you RM13,846.15 via bank telegraphic transfer, which shall be effected today.”
Zaid said that the “unauthorised acts” mentioned were not specified.
He added that currently, the firm is continuing to use the goodwill of his name, saying it amounts to misrepresentation under the law.
“The plaintiff (Zaid) avers and will contend that the defendant's (Zaid Ibrahim & Co) use of the plaintiff's personal as the name of its law firm, would lead the public or a class of the public to believe the services provided by the defendant were actually services provided by the plaintiff and/or that the defendant was economically related to the plaintiff," the statement of claim read.
Based on that, Zaid sought an order of injunction from the court and damages.
In addition to an injunction, Zaid has also sought for an interlocutory injunction against the firm under Order 29 of the Rules of Court 2012.
An interlocutory injunction is a temporary injunction awarded by the court during the course of a trial.
To obtain the temporary injunction, Zaid cited the fact that the firm's use of his name goes against a Bar Council ruling that a firm cannot use a partner's name if he has left the firm after a dissolution. – The Vibes, November 23, 2020
