Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
FIMBANK PLC – Appellant
Versus
PEMILIK DAN/ATAU PENCARTER DEMIS KAPAL ATAU VESEL NIKA KINI DIKENALI SEBAGAI BAO L.... – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's ability to renew writ in rem. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. background facts of fimbank's claims. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. fimbank's arguments for extending the writ. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. high court's dismissal of fimbank's application. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. purpose and object of o 6 r 7(2) of the rules. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. position in other jurisdictions regarding admiralty writs. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. fimbank's statutory right of action in rem. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 8. inherent powers of the court. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 9. additional orders sought by fimbank. (Para 52 , 53) |
| 10. answers to questions of law. (Para 55) |
Introduction
[1] The issue before the Federal Court concerns the number of times an admiralty writ in rem may be renewed. In this jurisdiction, the renewal of a writ is governed by O 6 r 7 of the Rules of Court 2012 ('the Rules'). More particularly, O 6 r 7(2) of the Rules expressly provides that the validity of a writ in an admiralty action may be extended five times where efforts to serve the writ on a defendant have been unsuccessful.
[2] The instant appeal turns on whether the C
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
