The court upheld that a Temporary Operating License, once issued, limits subsequent applications for stay or injunctions, emphasizing the necessity for affected parties to be included in judicial reviews against public authorities.

[1] This was an appeal by the appellants (the applicants in the High Court) against the decision of the learned judge of the Kuantan High Court given on 8 November 2012 dismissing the appellants' application (encl 13) dated 14 September 2012 for an interim stay until the final disposal of the pending judicial review proceedings.We heard the appeal on 19 December 2012, wherein at its conclusion we unanimously dismissed it with costs. We now give our reasons for so deciding. For convenience, we will refer to the parties in this judgment to the title assigned to them in the Court below.

[2] To make the point under discussion easier to understand, we think it is useful to state briefly the factual background and the sequence of events leading to the present appeal. The applicants are residents of the town of Kuantan, Kg Sungai Ular, Damansara Kuantan Township, and/or are registered proprietors of landed properties in the areas in the District of Kuantan and Gebeng, Pahang. The 1st respondent is the Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation and is responsible and empowered over the provisions of the Atomic Energy Licensing Act 1984 ( AELA ) and the rules and guidelines made pursuant to the said Act. The 2nd respondent is the Atomic Energy Licensing Board empowered under the to set the safety level to be complied under any projects or activities that use radioactive materials and/or produce radioactive waste or residue. The 3rd respondent, Lynas Corporation Ltd is a listed company under the Australian Securities Exchange incorporated in Australia. The 4th respondent, Lynas Malaysia Sdn Bhd, which was incorporated in Malaysia under the Companies Act 1965 , is a fully owned subsidiary of the 3rd respondent.

[3] One of the responsibilities of the 2nd respondent is to scrutinise and approve applications for licenses for a project by the 4th respondent's rare earth processing plant referred to as Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (LAMP) in Gebeng Industrial Area (hereinafter referred to as "GIA") Kuantan, Pahang. The main material utilised by LAMP is the rare earth called "lanthanide" concentrate which is obtained from lanthanide deposit mining operations from a mine in Mount Weld, Australia. These materials are used in the manufacture of modern equipments and devices such as disk drives, catalytic converter, mobile phones, and flat screen display. The 4th respondent has obtained approval of the mining license to produce "rare earth oxides and carbonates" in the GIA on 22 January 2008. The approval was given subject to conditions, especially to fulfill the various provisions in the AELA and the Environmental Quality Act 1974 .

[4] On 30 January 2012, a Temporary Operating License (TOL) was approved by the 2nd respondent to the 4th respondent. After that,on 7 February 2012, the applicants together with three other individuals had filed a notice of appeal to the 1st respondent pursuant to s 32 of the AELA against the decision of the 2nd respondent made on 30 January 2012. However, in a letter dated 27 March 2012, the applicants withdrew from proceeding with the appeal leaving the remaining individuals to proceed with the said appeal. On 13 June 2012, the 1st respondent had dismissed the appeal. Then, the applicants had on 14 July 2012 filed the judicial review proceedings (thereafter leave to commence judicial proceedings was granted on 28 August 2012) seeking the following reliefs:

(1) To apply for an order of certiorari for the purpose of quashing the decision of the 1st respondent made on the 13 June 2012 disallowing the appeal of Ismail bin Abu Bakar, Abujavalli a/p V Raman and Tan Ah Meng with the imposition of two additional conditions thus affirming the decision of the 2nd respondent m