MESSRS TAI CHOI YU & CO ADVOCATES vs ARIFIN ZAKARIA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 MarsdenLR 2366

COURT OF APPEAL KUCHING
MESSRS TAI CHOI YU & CO ADVOCATES – Appellant
Versus
ARIFIN ZAKARIA – Respondent

Table of Content
1. court's observations on the right of the attorney general to appear in appeal. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 18)
2. discussion on the classification of the attorney general's role in the proceedings. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
3. exposition of the judges' code of ethics governing judicial conduct. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
4. final ruling on the propriety of the appeal and adherence to judicial protocols. (Para 25 , 26)

[14] Reading the written submissions and hearing the oral submissions of the appellant and SFC in this appeal, the appellant's complaint was against the Attorney General or SFC in appearing and attending the ex parte hearing for leave for the judicial review application. The appellant submitted that the putative respondents were not represented by counsel nor by the Attorney General and that the Government or Attorney General was not a party in this action. It was submitted that the SFC who appeared had admitted that he was not acting for the putative respondents nor as amicus curiae. It was submitted that the Attorney General or SFC was not invited to attend at the hearing and therefore had no locus standi and that the learned judge had erred.

[15] We had read the grounds