PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA vs CHIN CHEE KOW

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 1826

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
CHIN CHEE KOW – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Rosli Ahmad ,Respondent Advocate: Ravi Chandran

Table of Content
1. judicial review based on attorney general's refusal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. judicial review eligibility and consent requirements. (Para 11)
3. arguments concerning requirement for affidavit and locus standi. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
4. court's analysis of public interest and judicial supervision. (Para 16 , 19 , 20)
5. arguments regarding procedural requirements for judicial review. (Para 17 , 18)

[1] The Attorney General, the appellant in this case, is appealing against the decision of the High Court at Penang which had on 28 September 2016, allowed the respondent's application for leave to commence Judicial Review proceedings under O 53 of the Rules of 2012.

[2] The application for leave to commence Judicial Review proceedings was against the refusal of the appellant to give consent under s 9 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956 ( GPA ) to initiate a proceeding for the purpose of appointing an additional trustee or a new trustee in public charitable trust of Liam Hood Thong Chor Seng Thuan Pulau Pinang.

Background Facts

[3] The facts are as appearing in the grounds of judgment of the learned Judicial Commissioner (JC) which we will reproduce in the following paragraphs with mi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 1826

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAPEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – AppellantVersusCHIN CHEE KOW – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
CHIN CHEE KOW – Respondent