ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD, ZAKI TUN AZMI, ZULKEFLI AHMAD MAKINUDIN
ASEAN SECURITY PAPER MILLS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
MITSUI SUMITOMO INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD – Respondent
Abdul Hamid Mohamad CJ:
[1] I have had the privilege of reading the draft judgment of the learned President of the Court of Appeal. I agree with his conclusion. However, I wish to emphasize a few points.
[2] The first thing that must be borne in mind is that this court is not hearing an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal. That, this court had done and the judgment of this court was delivered on 2 February 2007. What is before us now is an application for this court to review its own decision. The application is made under r. 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 ("RFC 1995)" and/or its inherent jurisdiction.
[3] Secondly, it must also be borne in mind that a court decides a case on the evidence adduced in court, not on public opinion, even though, it may be that the public opinion represents the truth of what had actually happened. To give a simple example, someone is dead and public opinion is that he has been murdered by the accused person. But, if the charge is not proved beyond reasonable doubt according to law, the murderer may be acquitted by the court. After all the court is a court of law, not of public opinion. The case of Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.