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

2001 MarsdenLR 1520

MOHAMED DZAIDDIN, ABDUL MALEK AHMAD, WAN ADNAN ISMAIL
DATO SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM – Appellant
Versus
DATO SERI DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Mohamed Dzaiddin CJ:

This is an application for leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal under s. 96(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA).

Encik Karpal, for the applicant, formulated three questions for our consideration. However, in the course of his submission he wanted leave to be granted only on two questions, namely:

(1)Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding the convictions of Sukma Darmawan and Dr. Munawar Anees by the Sessions Court, Kuala Lumpur and the admission of the facts read out in Court by both of them could constitute a defence of justification in respect of the offending words meriting dismissal of the applicant's suit under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of the High Court, 1980; and

(2)Whether the Court of Appeal was right in relying on the principle in Lange v. Atkinson3 NZLR (1988) 424 and concluding the decision of the learned trial Judge on the issues of qualified privilege should not be disturbed having regard to the application to strike out the applicant's suit being one under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of the High Court, 1980.

We are of the view that the question of law as distilled from the above questions for

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