SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 MarsdenLR 1706

HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK KOTA KINABALU
AMBIGA SREENEVASAN – Appellant
Versus
DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION SABAH & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. final ruling and cost considerations. (Para 1)
2. judicial review limitations under the immigration act. (Para 2 , 3 , 6 , 10)
3. no absolute right for immigration without proof. (Para 4 , 5)
Gabriel Gumis JC:

[1] On 28 September 2015 this court disallowed the Applicant's application for Judicial Review, with no order as to costs.

[2] Section 65 of the Immigration Act 1959/63 provides that the act or direction given to the 1st Respondent by the State Authority can only be questioned on ground of procedural non-compliance. The court is precluded from exercising its power of Judicial Review to examine the validity of the exercise of administrative powers conferred by the Act on substantive grounds/fairness (in this case alleged violation of fundamental liberties and any other reasons).

[3] The ouster clause in s 59A of the Immigration Act in clear and explicit terms provide that any act made by the State Authority is not subject to Judicial Review except on grounds of procedural non-compliance of the requirements of the Act. Pihak Berkuasa Negeri Sabah v. Sugumar Balakrishnan & Anor Appeal, [2002] 3 MLJ 72 (which is the landmark case in the special right of immigration

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top