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

2016 MarsdenLR 2564

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DEE BEE YOKE & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
NICK ABU DASUKI HJ ABU HASSAN & ANOR – Respondent


Table of Content
1. the court is asked to exercise its inherent powers. (Para 1 , 2)
2. challenges to the court's jurisdiction were presented. (Para 3 , 4)
3. judicial review basis established through prior cases. (Para 5 , 6)
4. respondents contend jurisdiction limitations for review. (Para 7 , 10 , 13)
5. final decision highlighted a lack of grounds for review. (Para 8 , 11)
6. background details of the applicants' claims are provided. (Para 9)

[1] In encl 2(a)m the Applicants applied to this Court to exercise its inherent powers and to give the following orders as prayed:

'(i) Bahawa Pemohon-Pemohon/Perayu/Plaintif Ketiga dan Keempat diberi kebenaran untuk memfailkan permohonan ini;

(ii) Bahawa Keputusan Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini yang menolak rayuan Pemohon-Pemohon diketepikan;

(iii) Bahawa keputusan Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini bahawa Pemohon Pertama/Perayu Ketiga tidak mempunyai hak atau 'locus'sebagai isteri undang-undang lazim/isteri berkahwin istiadat untuk membawa tindakan kehilangan tanggungan diketepikan;

(iv) Bahawa keputusan Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini yang memutuskan bahawa definasi 'isteri' di bawah Undang -Undang Sivil 1956 harus dibaca untuk bermaksud seorang isteri yang berkahwin secar

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