Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
JOSEPH PAULUS LANTIP & ORS – Appellant
Versus
UNILEVER PLC – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal introduction and context (Para 1 , 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of the case (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. dispute and court procedures (Para 9) |
| 4. court's observations on legal principles (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 27 , 34) |
| 5. striking out application results (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. arguments regarding res judicata and jurisdiction (Para 15 , 19 , 20 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. arguments of the 3rd & 4th defendants (Para 16 , 18) |
| 8. arguments concerning res judicata (Para 21) |
| 9. counsel arguments and case law references (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 10. explanation of res judicata doctrine (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 11. service of writ out of jurisdiction (Para 33 , 35 , 36) |
| 12. further considerations on jurisdiction (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 13. striking out application nature and requirements (Para 41 , 42) |
| 14. court's approach towards striking out applications (Para 43) |
[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal dated 13 October 2010 reversing the High Court's decision in dismissing the respondent's striking out application made under O 18 r 19 of the Rules of the High 1980 ("the RHC"). Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 7 February 2012 on the following question:
"Whether
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
