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

2009 MarsdenLR 2680

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
DATUK HJ MOHAMMAD TUFAIL MAHMUD & ORS – Appellant
Versus
DATO TING CHECK SII – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Zaki Tun Azmi CJ:

Questions

[1] In light of the urgency of the matter, we gave our decision earlier. Here now are our reasons.

3

[2] The right to be heard is an integral part of the rules of natural justice. The right to be represented by counsel of one's choice is however conditional upon the laws regulating it. Such conditions are the subject matter of this judgment.

[3] The two questions posed before us were drafted as follows:-

(i) Whether an advocate and solicitor from Peninsular Malaysia is entitled to appear as counsel in an appeal to be heard in Putrajaya arising from a matter originating from the High Court in Sarawak and Sabah at Kuching?

(ii) Whether an advocate from Sarawak is entitled to appear as counsel in an appeal to be heard (by the Court of Appeal) in Putrajaya arising from a matter originating from the High Court in Sarawak and Sabah at Kuching?

(Words in parenthesis were added)

[4] The answers to the above questions would determine whether there exist any exclusive rights of the advocates and solicitors of Sabah and Sarawak to appear in Peninsular Malaysia and vice versa.

Facts Leading To The Questions

[5] Both appeals that came before us were not regarding the re


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