Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA PENANG
SYAFIQA SHIRLEYNA CHAN ABDULLAH – Appellant
Versus
MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for judicial review (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. reliefs sought by the applicant (Para 3) |
| 3. background facts of the applicant's conversion (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. role of the attorney general in judicial review (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. test in granting leave for judicial review (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. attorney general's objection to jurisdiction (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. distinction between civil and syariah courts (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. jurisdiction of syariah courts over conversion matters (Para 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 9. expertise of syariah courts in religious matters (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63) |
| 10. applicant's submission on jurisdiction (Para 67 , 68 , 69) |
| 11. conclusion on jurisdiction and judicial review (Para 77 , 78) |
Introduction
[1] This is an application dated 17 April 2023 filed by the Applicant for leave to apply for judicial review under O 53 r 3(1) of the Rules of Court 2012.
[2] On 26 June 2023, I refused leave for the judicial review application. Here are the grounds of my decision.
Reliefs Sought By The Applicant
[3] The Applicant seeks for the following reliefs;
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
