FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
BELLAJADE SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CME GROUP BERHAD & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's power to review prior legal decisions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of tenancy dispute. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. background and procedural history of the case. (Para 7) |
| 4. coram failure invalidates decision making. (Para 12 , 14 , 22 , 24) |
| 5. coram failure in court composition. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 25) |
| 6. judgment validity is contingent on judges' current status. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 7. judgment reliance and its implications. (Para 29 , 30) |
[1] The applicant made two applications under r 137 of the Rules of the Federal 1995 (r 137) to review and set aside the entire judgment of the Federal Court (both the majority and the minority) delivered on 25 September 2018 (including the Federal Court Order dated 13 November 2017 granting the respondent leave to appeal).
[2] The grounds upon which the applications were premised were as follows:
(i) Coram Failure as the three of four remaining judges of the original coram purported to "concur and adopt the Judgment" of Tan Sri Dato Seri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin (Tan Sri Zulkefli), who had resigned as a judge on 11 July 2018, prior to the delivery and pronouncement of the judgment which renders the judgment invalid, contrary to la
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.