The requirement for court documents to be in the national language is mandatory, and failure to comply within the specified timeframe leads to dismissal of applications.

See Mee Chun JCA:

Introduction And Parties

[1] The Appellant Husband (Husband) and the Respondent Wife (Wife) are judicially separated pursuant to a petition for judicial separation filed by the Wife. They have a child (Child) from the marriage.

Proceedings In The High Court

[2] There have been various proceedings filed in the High Court, relevant to the appeal, which we set down below.

[3] Enclosure 6 was filed on 7 January 2022 by the Wife for an ex parte order for various reliefs. It was allowed in part on 24 January 2022 where an ex parte injunction was granted to prohibit the Husband from removing the Child from Peninsular Malaysia; and molesting and/or harassing the Wife. Refer to the Court order in encl 4/127-130 where the relevant part is reproduced as follows:

"ADALAH DIPERINTAHKAN DAN DIARAHKAN bahawa Responden oleh dirinya sendiri, pekerjanya atau ejennya atau sebagainya dihalang dan suatu injuksi adalah dengan ini diberikan menahannya daripada:

(a) Membawa Anak tersebut keluar dari Semenanjung Malaysia tanpa kebenaran bertulis daripada Pempetisyen ataupun perintah Mahkamah sehingga pelupusan petisyen ini;

(b) Menyerang, mencabul, menjengkelkan atau menggangu Pempetisyen;

(c) Satu pengurusan kes permohonan inter partes bagi relif-relif dan injunksi secara interim sementara pelupusan petisyen ditetapkan pada 21 Februari 2022 dan arahan-arahan yang sewajarnya akan diberikan untuk pendengaran inter partes; dan

(d) Perintah interim akan terbatal dengan sendiri dan perlu didengar bersama-sama permohonan inter partes sekiranya gagal membuat serahan ke atas Responden dalam tempoh masa 21 hari dari tarikh perintah ini."

[4] Enclosure 20 was then filed in English on 24 March 2022 by the Husband to set aside the ex parte order. The application sought the following:

"1. that the Order granted ex parte by this Honourable Court on 24 January 2022 (encl 14) be set aside;

2. that the Petitioner be ordered to pay damages of RM1,000.00 per day or such sums as this Honourable Court deems fit (the Damages) from 24 January 2022 until encl 14 is set aside;

2.1. the Petitioner shall pay the Damages to the Respondent within 7 days of the service of the order on the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's firm of solicitors;

3. that the Petitioner be ordered to pay costs to the Respondent within 7 days of the service of the order on the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's firm of solicitors;"

[5] The grounds in support of encl 20 are as follows:

"a) There was no urgency and/or merit to necessitate an ex parte application in the filing of the notice of Application dated 7 January 2022 (encl 6) and/or the granting of encl 14.

b) The Petitioner failed to give full and frank disclosure on material facts.

c) The Petitioner did not comply with O 29 r 1 and O 41 r 1(4) of the Rules of Court (the ROC ).

d) The Respondent did not comply with rr 61(1) and 91 of the Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules 1980 (the DMPR).

e) The Petitioner has suffered damages and incurred costs as a result of the granting of encl 14."

[6] Enclosure 26 was next filed by the Husband on 18 April 2022 for inter alia sole guardianship, custody, care and control of the Child with supervised access to the Wife. There was a consent order recorded.

[7] Thereafter, the Husband then sought for encl 20 to be heard whereupon the HC struck it out. The Notes of Proceedings for 22 June 2022 (encl 4/5) has the following minute:

"MINIT:

Arahan amalan bil 8th [2014] O 92 r 1(4) not complied supposed to file BM version within 2 weeks Method of Disposal: SO-Dibatalkan

KEPUTUSAN

MAH: SO LAMP 20"

[8] Hence, the appeal by the Husband.

Decision Of The HC

[9] The gr