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 BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under 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%20(Special%20Issue).3814
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
