JUDGMENT

Lee Hun Hoe (Borneo) CJ:

I have read the judgement of Chang Min Tat FJ with which I agree. I would like to say a few words on two matters.

First, an attempt was made by respondents to amend the defence and counterclaim during the hearing of this appeal. Normally, application for amendment should be made at the trial as early as possible to prevent surprise. The terms of the amendment should also be submitted at the earliest possible time to the other party or parties and handed to the Judge when the application is made. Appellant only came to know of the intention of respondents to apply for amendment on the day of the hearing of this appeal. Although r. 8(1) of the Federal Court (Civil Appeals) (Transitional) Rules, 1963 and O. 58 r. 4 of the Rules of the Supreme Court confer on this Court the power of the High Court as to amendment it has rarely been exercised. If amendment was necessary respondents should ask for leave to make it at the proper time and in the proper manner. This Court will only permit amendment on very good ground and strong justification. Leave to amend was refused.

Secondly, the defence of illegality must fail in limine. The significant common featu