THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MALAYSIA v. DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB TUN HAJI ABDUL RAZAK & ANOTHER APPEAL

[2025] 6 MLRA 155
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Hasnah Mohammed Hashim CJM, Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Hanipah Farikullah FCJJ
[Civil Appeal Nos: 01(i)-12-05-2025(W) & 01(i)-13-05-2025(W)]
13 August 2025

JUDGMENT

Zabariah Mohd Yusof FCJ:

[1] There are 2 appeals by the learned Attorney General of Malaysia before us, namely:

(i) Civil Appeal No 01(i)-12-05/2025(W):

— Appeal against the entirety of the majority decision of the Court of Appeal dated 6 January 2025 which allowed the respondent's appeal and set aside the entire decision of the High Court Judge dated 3 July 2024, which dismissed the application for leave for Judicial Review, with no order as to cost; and

(ii) Civil Appeal No 01(i)-13-05/2025(W):

— Appeal against the entirety of the majority decision of the Court of Appeal dated 6 January 2025, that allowed the respondent's application in encl 26 (application to adduce additional evidence) dated 3 December 2024 at the Court of Appeal with no order as to costs.

[2] The 2 Appeals before us are premised upon the following Questions of law:

"(1)Whether the principles established in Ladd v. Marshall [1954] 3 All ER 745 ("Ladd v. Marshall") have been codified or merely reflected in r 7(3A) of the Rules of Court of Appeal 1994 ("RCA 1994");

(2) Whether r 7(3A) of the RCA 1994 renders the principles in Ladd v. Marshall concerning the admission of fresh or additional evidence in the Court of Appeal no longer applicable;

(3) Whether r 7(3A) of the RCA 1994 imposes a higher threshold on parties seeking to introduce fresh or additional evidence by requiring proof of a "determining influence, "which exceeds the "important influence" threshold established in Ladd v. Marshall;

(4) At the leave stage for judicial review proceedings, whether the burden of proof regarding the existence of disputed fresh or additional evidence lies with the Attorney General (AG) in his capacity when acting solely under O 53 r 3(3) of the Rules of Court 2012;

(5) At the leave stage for Judicial Review proceedings, whether there is any legal obligation to compel any authority to confirm the existence of and provide copies of documents to the Applicant, particularly with respect to the AG, who is acting solely in his capacity under O 53 r 3(3) of the Rules of Court 2012;

Sign up to view full cases Login