Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
SIVARASA RASIAH – Appellant
Versus
BADAN PEGUAM MALAYSIA & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appellant's position and qualification. (Para 1) |
| 2. constitutionality challenge based on fundamental rights. (Para 2) |
| 3. methodology for interpreting constitutional rights. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. basic structure doctrine in constitutional law. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. interpretation of 'association' under art 10(1)(c). (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. definition of 'law' under art 5(1). (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. application of art 8(1) in fundamental rights challenges. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 9. distinction between equality before the law and equal protection of laws. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 10. proportionality test in assessing state action. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 11. conclusion on validity and constitutionality of s 46a. (Para 33) |
[1] The appellant is an advocate and solicitor. He is also an office bearer of a political party and a member of Parliament. He wishes to stand for and, if elected, serve on the Bar Council which is the governing body of the Malaysian Bar. Section 46A (1) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 ("the Act") prohibits him from doing so. It says, among other things not relevant here:
A person shall be disqualifi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
