Experience Lawyer?

It is this incident that strike my mind to define the meaning of an experience lawyer.

I was asked to draft a simple cause papers. I drafted it during my 9 months pupillege in KL. Hence, I know it is this "A" way of drafting. I look through the file, and found that, there's document "B" to be attached together with "A" which is done by a KL lawyer. I know exactly what it is. However, my boss insisted that a document "C" is to be included. I wonder for a way when I was told by my secretary. The reason because, there is nothing to be put on "C" anymore because all the necessary explaination already put in "B". I guess my boss did not realise it because he didn't know what document "B" is. Why is that? Well, the simple reason is that because he only practice in Sabah all these while and he is stubborn and proud, thinking that what he know is the BEST already. No...don't caught me wrong. I am not saying he is not good... I believe anyone who has experience for 6 years or more is really good in their drafting and work.

My dad reminded me that, he is experienced. But I am asking my dad this question: If someone is working in this small town and drafting the same kind of documents for 6 years, would it make the person a good and experience lawyer?

In the above incident, my boss asked my secretary to tell me to follow the Practice Direction. Wow... I have no mean of discharging myself from following the Practice Direction. However, I am also would like stress that Practice Direction is only a guidelines and not a Rules of law hence, we shouldn't follow blindly. In the Rules of High Court 1980 is clearly stated that only document "B" is needed and I do not understand why we need "C" and honestly, I never come across any Practice Direction which said we need both documents.

After I done some research and check through all the documents again, I found out that all these while, Sabah is not following the Rules of High Cour 1980 strictly. They are having their 'local style'. So, when we receive document "B" from KL, they really do not know how to deal with it. They get confused!!!

To me, a good lawyer is not someone can only make money with their "same drafting experiences", but someone who has wisdom and understanding. I know as a junior lawyer, my drafting is still very inexperience, but I do not need all the unnecessary "wrong teaching". That reminds me on a really good senior of mine. To me, he is really an experience lawyer, although he is in his 5th year. That's because of 2 simple reasons: 1. Humble 2. Confident. He is someone who doesn't really afraid of failure and learning process. Whenever I ask him some questions which he didn't know himself, he will take the troubles to check it out with me. He is not afraid of troubles to teach and guide. He won't laugh at our mistakes. He brought me out for various trials and teach me some ways of dealing, drafting, and even handling meetings and meeting with clients. He listens to us and always humble himself by discussing every matter with us, although he know he is correct and we are wrong. Well, he explains what we did wrong by showing us not only the cases and Practice Directions, but also the Rules and the reason stated in the Rules. In simple, he teaches me how to use my brain and my knowledge instead of just following blindly. Well, this senior of mind, I truely consider him as an experience lawyer!

Of course, I cannot make comparison between a Sabah lawyer and a KL lawyer.. simply because the Sabahan are more relax in their practices. But yes, I am of the opinion that to be a good and experience lawyer, someone should not follow certain precedence but someone who has wisdom- from the Lord!!