KUALA LUMPUR (July 30): The High Court has dismissed a judicial review application by Brickfields Asia College (BAC) to challenge the Legal Profession Qualifying Board's (LPQB) decision to bar 17 graduates from its law transfer programme from sitting for the Certificate in Legal Practice (CLP) examination.

They were part of 75 students who originally began their degree studies under BAC's UK Transfer Law (UKTL) programme and were initially set to complete their final year at various British universities.

But travel restrictions and lockdowns imposed during the Covid-19 pandemic made going abroad impossible, so they transferred to the University of London (UOL) external degree programme to finish their final two years in Malaysia while taking exams marked in the UK, according to court documents.

"The lockdowns and restrictions caused a negative impact on the Malaysian economy, which led to numerous Malaysians suffering financial hardships," BAC managing director Raja Singham said in an affidavit.

However, the LPQB ruled that this hybrid transfer made the students ineligible for the CLP exam, which led to BAC's legal challenge, on behalf of 17 of the affected students. The board also maintained that under its CLP eligibility guidelines for twinning programmes, students have to complete their final years in the UK.

In dismissing BAC's application on July 28 and ordering the college to pay RM15,000 costs, High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching ruled that BAC had missed the legal window to file the challenge.

She noted that LPQB made its final decision on the matter on Aug 29, 2023, but BAC didn't file the court challenge until Feb 13, 2024. By law, any application for judicial review must be filed promptly or within three months from the date the decision was communicated to the applicant.

The judge also agreed with the LPQB that the transfer programme students does not fall within the three recognised pathways for CLP eligibility.

And she held that the LPQB has the legal authority to set and interpret its own rules, saying its decision was neither illegal nor irrational, and that the courts would not want to interfere with the board's statutory discretion regarding this matter.

The court also found that there were no representations made by the LPQB that could give rise to a legitimate expectation from BAC or the affected students that they would be permitted to sit for the CLP.

Lawyer Khoo Guan Huat, who represented LPQB together with his co-counsel Muhammad Danial Iman Ahmad Terrirudin, confirmed the court's decision when contacted.

BAC was represented by Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar and his co-counsels Phoebe Loi Yean Wei, See Hau Tsien and Abby Si Xinyi.

A BAC spokesperson told The Edge after Thursday's court decision that it "does not apply to any other UKTL and UOL students".

Before this, Raja Singham was reported as saying in June that the college would subsidise £8,000 (RM47,830) in fees for the affected graduates if they chose to pursue the UK Bar examinations instead, should the judicial review fail.