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

2013 MarsdenLR 100

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
LATHEEFA BEEBI KOYA & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
SURUHANJAYA PENCEGAHAN RASUAH MALAYSIA & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. applicants' background and reliefs (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. applicants argue for judicial review standards (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. respondents argue against the presence of a decision (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. legal basis for judicial review outlined (Para 13)

[1] Both the applicants are advocates and solicitors of the High Court of Malaya. They acted for one Datuk Shamsubahrin bin Ismail (their client) who had been summoned by the 1st respondent to give statement to assist in investigation of an offence under s 16(b)(B) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 (Act 694) against one Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Salleh bin Ismail, the Executive Director of National Feedlot Corporation (NFC). The order to give statement was pursuant to s 30 of Act 694.

[2] The applicants had on 19 March 2012, accompanied their client to the 1st respondent's premises and insisted to be present throughout the recording of the statement, on the instruction of their client. According to the affidavit in reply of the respondents, as the situation then was tense and with the presence of reporters, the applicants were allowed to accompany their client during statement taking but the applicant

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