PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA vs CHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 MarsdenLR 2522

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
CHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Shamsol Bolhassan,Rosli Ahmad ,Respondent Advocate: Ravi Chandran

Table of Content
1. assessing justiciability of ag's consent. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the justiciability of the attorney general's consent under the government proceedings act. (Para 3 , 4)
3. the historical context and legal standing of the trust's administrative decisions. (Para 12 , 16 , 18 , 19)

[1] There are two appeals before us, namely:

(i) Civil Appeal No 01(f)-58-10-2017(P) ("Civil Appeal No 58"); and

(ii) Civil Appeal No 01(f)-59-11-2017(P) ("Civil Appeal No 59").

[2] This court had directed that both appeals be heard together. The leave questions in respect of which applications for leave to appeal were allowed in these appeals were in relation to the justiciability of the Attorney Generals consent or his refusal to give consent under s 9(1) of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 ("Act 359").

[3] The question of law in Civil Appeal No 58 is as follows:

"Whether the written consent given by the Attorney General under s 9(1) of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 in respect of civil cases is non- justifiable or non-reviewable."

[4] The question of law in Civil Appeal No 59 is as follows:

"Whether the consent given by the Attorney General under s 9(1) of the Government Proceedings Act 19

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 MarsdenLR 2522

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYAPEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – AppellantVersusCHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
CHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent