James Foong FCJ:

Introduction

[1] The deputy registrar of the Federal Court has refused to review her own decision where she awarded only a sum of RM16,000 to the respondents for getting-up fees against a request for RM400,000 in the respondents' Bill of Costs.

[2] Dissatisfied with this, the respondents filed this summons-in-chambers to a judge of the Federal Court to review the decision of the deputy registrar pursuant to O 59 r 36(1) Rules of High 1980 (RHC) which is applicable to the Federal Court by virtue of r 3 of the Federal Rules 1995.

[3]Order 59 r 36 RHC says:

(1) Any party who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Registrar to allow or to disallow any item in whole or in part on review under r 34 or 35, or with the amount allowed in respect of any item by the Registrar on any such review, may apply to a Judge for an order to review the taxation as to that item or part of an item, if but only if, one of the parties to the proceedings before the Registrar requested the Registrar in accordance with r 35 (3) to state the reasons for his decision in respect of that item or part on the review.

Background Of The Case

[4] The background of this case is this: The applicant and both the respondents were candidates in a Sabah State election held on 13 March 1999 for the constituency of Likas. After the election, the appellant was declared the winner. Both the respondents were dissatisfied with this outcome. They respectively filed election petitions to challenge the result. Both the election petitions were consolidated and heard by the election judge, Justice Muhamad Kamil. After 28 days of staggered trial, the election judge ruled that the applicant had committed an Election Offence under s 11(1)(c), 11(1)(d) and s 32 of the Election Offences Act 1954, in respect of the first petition (K5). He accordingly declared the election result for this constituency null and void.

[5] In respect of the second petition (K11), having come to a conclusion that the electoral roll for the said constituency contained names of non-citizens and disqualified persons, the said judge also declared that the election result for this constituency null and void.

[6] Upon these decisions, a certificate and a report required under s 36 and 37 of the Election Offences Act were issued to announce that the applicant is not returned as an elected representative to the State Assembly of Sabah for the constituency of Likas.

[7] Dissatisfied with this decision, the applicant filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal challenging the decisions of the Election Court. Further, in view of the effect of the certificate and report issued by the Election Court which requires the Election Commission to hold a by-election within a specific time, the applicant applied for and obtained an order to stay the execution of the Election Court's orders pending an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

[8] On 6 June 2002, the Court of Appeal by majority (with Justice KC Vohrah dissenting) dismissed the applicant's appeal on the ground that a decision of the Election Court is not appealable.

[9] Refusing to accept this decision, the applicant on 1 July 2002, filed an applicationt the Federal Court for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal. Pending the disposal of this leave application to the Federal Court, the applicant obtained an order to stay the effect of the Election Court's decisions.

[10] On 3 September 2002, the applicant's leave application to the Federal Court was heard. His application was refused.

[11] By 23 April 2003, the respondents had filed their Notice of Taxation and Bill of Costs for costs incurred in opposing the applicant's leave application in the Federal Court.

[12] On 20 August 2003, the deputy registrar of the Federal Court handed down to the respondents a sum of RM16,000 as getting-up fees against a claim of RM400,000.

[13] Dissatisfied with this, the respondents applied to the deputy registrar of the Federal Court to review her own decision u