The landmark decision in Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 is seen as a momentous milestone in the development of negligence claims with far-reaching consequences for how professional negligence is interpreted in various legal systems. The case introduced what is known as the Caparo test, which considers foreseeability, proximity, and reasonableness to establish a duty of care. Malaysian courts also recognised and adopted the Caparo test while adjudicating claims against professionals, particularly auditors. Accordingly, this paper explores how the Malaysian judiciary embraced and modified the Caparo test, particularly in setting legal precedents and defining professional negligence claims via a doctrinal analysis. The paper attempts to enhance understanding of the adaptability of landmark principles in assessing negligence claims against professionals.