100_2066.jpg
THE FIRM

THOMAS PHILIP is a medium-sized law firm focused on civil and commercial litigation in both trial and appellate cases.  Our clients include individuals as well as business and corporate entities.

We have chosen to dedicate our practice EXCLUSIVELY to litigation, and therefore, we hire lawyers who have passion for litigation and who pride themselves on their excellence in advocacy and trial skills. Our lawyers have the ability to excel in  high-pressure, intellectually challenging environments, and who have, from the beginning of their legal careers, assumed responsibility quickly and performed well on their feet. They have the courage to represent our clients in difficult cases and advocate unpopular positions with integrity. The best settlements are reached when the opposing party knows that your lawyers have a consistent record of victories and are ready, if necessary, to go to trial.

Whilst we provide the results-oriented legal representation expected at larger firms, we are mindful that our success is measured by how well we achieve our clients’ business and legal objectives. We are therefore committed to providing assistance that is personalised and cost-effective, whilst aiming for practical, commercially-sound and innovative solutions.  All our cases are staffed efficiently in order to provide maximum value and effective client-centred service. 

Presently, we are able to represent clients in the following dispute resolution forums:

  • Federal Court
  • Court of Appeal
  • High Court
  • Arbitration
  • Mediation
We are able to refer clients with Subordinate Court and Industrial Court claims to other law firms within our referral network, upon request.

Our firm's track record includes a number of important reported decisions and have notably contributed to the development and clarification of the law in significant cases such as the recent Federal Court decision of Duli Yang Amat Mulia Tunku Ibrahim Ismail Ibni Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj V. Datuk Captain Hamzah Mohd Noor & Another Appeal [2009] 4 CLJ 329.