JUDGMENT

Siti Norma Yaakob JCA:

This appeal arose from the refusal of the High Court to grant an order of certiorari to the appellant to quash the award of the 2nd respondent that upheld the appellant's dismissal from the employment of the 1st respondent to be for just cause or excuse. However before us, the 1st respondent raised two preliminary issues namely non-compliance by the appellant with:

(1) Practice Direction No. 3 of 1992 and

(2) Rules 18(4)(c) and 18(6) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994 ("the Rules").

We had agreed with the submissions of Mr. T.J. Su, counsel for the 1st respondent and upheld the preliminary objections but to appreciate them, we need to go back and trace all the proceedings that were commenced by the appellant in the courts below.

In 1987, following a domestic enquiry held by the 1st respondent on 4 June of that year, the appellant was informed by letter bearing the same date, that he had been dismissed from his employment as a credit control officer with the 1st respondent on three founded charges of:

(1) persistently contravening credit control procedures and instructions.

(2) acting without authority by instructing Messrs. C. S. Tang & Co., a