PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has denied three businessmen the opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of two legal provisions restricting appeals from interlocutory decisions.
An interlocutory decision is a ruling issued by a court while a suit is ongoing, which does not finally dispose of the case.
In 2022, the trio – Ong Saw Yong, Chew Khor Teng and Phang Tee Yong – filed a lawsuit in the High Court seeking to challenge the validity of amendments to Sections 28 and 68 of the Court of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA), which came into force earlier that year.
Following the amendment, Section 28 bars appeals to the High Court from lower court decisions that dismiss applications for summary judgment, striking out of suits or pleadings, or setting aside default judgments.
Section 68 prohibits similar appeals from the High Court to the Court of Appeal.
Ong, Chew and Phang were defendants in a civil action brought by Pasir Bogak Sdn Bhd in 2021 to recover approximately RM14.5 million from a land sale.
Their application to have the suit struck out was dismissed by the High Court in 2022, from which they had no right of appeal.
They then brought the present lawsuit against the government, claiming that the amendments to Section 28 and 68 of the CJA violated their constitutional right to freely express their disagreement with a court’s decision.
The suit was dismissed by the High Court.
The trio also failed in their appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Today, a three-member bench led...
By Daniel Dale, CNN (CNN) — President Donald Trump made some false claims to the press while meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House on Monday, including a long-debu...