SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 MarsdenLR 1809

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LUA & MANSOR – Appellant
Versus
TAN AH KIM – Respondent


Table of Content
1. the taxation order in divorce proceedings is questioned. (Para 1 , 3 , 6)
2. agreed fees conflict with taxation rules. (Para 4 , 5 , 17)
3. accord and fees payments (Para 8 , 9)
4. validity of taxation order (Para 11)
5. statutory compliance and jurisdiction (Para 16 , 19)
6. court jurisdiction on taxation orders is defined. (Para 18 , 20 , 21)

[1] In the High Court at Temerloh, the appellant/plaintiff had applied to set aside a taxation order dated 14 July 2014 (Taxation Order). His application was dismissed. Dissatisfied with that decision, he filed an appeal to this Court. We had on 16 February 2016, allowed the appeal of the appellant and set aside the Taxation Order made by the learned trial judge. We set out below the reasons for our decision.

[2] We will refer to the parties as they were referred to, at the High Court.

[3] The impugned Taxation Order was made by the High Court relating to divorce proceedings of the defendant. In that divorce proceedings at the Temerloh High Court, the defendant's husband had petitioned for a divorce against her and a decree nisi dated 21 October 2009 was granted. The defendant however did not seek for any ancillary reliefs in that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top