Comparative Analysis of Legislative Reform of Admission by Apologetic Discourse

Abstract

This study compares the protection of admission by apologetic discourse through legislative reform in selected Common Law jurisdictions. The legislative reform provides a solution to the long-standing problem of adverse legal effects of admission by apologetic discourse made by professionals/practitioners who had breached their duty of care, code of ethics, or conducts. A similar problem is reported in Malaysia due to similarities in evidentiary rules, insurance contract clauses and statutory limitation law attributed to the Common Law system. The findings of this comparative study help towards the development of the law that protects admission by apologetic discourse for professional negligence and misconduct in Malaysia.

Keywords: Apologetic discourse; admission; legislative reform; professional negligence and misconduct

eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2022. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open-access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under the responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians), and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v7iSI7.3814