Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
INSTITUT AKAUNTAN MALAYSIA & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
NAGARAJAN THAMBILAH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against dab decision. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. background facts of disciplinary proceedings. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. hc's observations on procedural delays. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. delay in lodging complaint is unreasonable. (Para 22 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 5. prejudice caused by delay in proceedings. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 6. furr's failure to reference frr as procedural impropriety. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 7. judicial review grounds supporting respondent. (Para 49 , 50 , 51) |
| 8. decision quashed for procedural impropriety. (Para 52) |
Introduction
[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court (HC) which granted an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the 2nd Appellant which is the Disciplinary Appeal Board (DAB) in finding the Respondent guilty of the charges of unprofessional conduct and the consequential punishment.
Parties
[2] The 1st Appellant is the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) incorporated under the Accountants Act 1967 (the Act) to inter alia regulate the practice of the profession of accountancy in
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
