Back
HIGH COURT (MIRI)
LEE HENG CHEONG, J
Messrs Tai Choi Yu & Co Advocates (suing as a firm and TAI CHOI YU as sole-proprietor) – Appellant
Versus
The Court of Appeal & Ors – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for order against representation legality. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of the plaintiff's claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's reasoning regarding affidavit evidence. (Para 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. consideration of defendants' representation legality. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 5. court's findings on the role of the attorney general. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 23) |
GROUNDS OF ECISION
[In respect of Enclosure 6]
INTRODUCTION
[1]Enclosure 6 is an application by the Plaintiff for an order that the Defendants’ Memorandum of Appearance filed by the Federal Attorney-General’s Chambers be set aside and/or struck off or that the purported representation of the Defendants by the Federal Attorney-General’s Chambers be struck out or deleted under Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012 [“ ROC 2012”]
[2]The grounds of the above Notice of Application are :
[i]That the 1st Defendant is an independent arm established under the constitution on the principle of separation of powers of [1] the legislative, [2] the judiciary and [3] the executive and therefore the representation by the Federal Attorney-General’s Chambers is unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional;
[ii]That th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
