JUDGMENT

Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJ:

[1] Pared to its bare facts, this is what this application for 'review' was.

[2] On 3 May 2018, the applicant was granted leave to appeal under s 96(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 [Act 91]. The applicant proceeded to file a Notice of Appeal on 16 May 2018 and thereafter, filed the records of appeal, memorandum of appeal and other bundles of documents as are generally required for the hearing of the substantive appeal.

[3] On 25 June 2018, the respondents moved the Federal Court under r 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 and/or inherent jurisdiction to strike out the order granting the applicant leave to appeal as well as his Notice of Appeal. The respondents cited the full satisfaction of the judgment sum with interest and the receipt of that judgment sum as the basis for arguing that the application for leave to appeal had been rendered redundant and nugatory with the Federal Court correspondingly having no jurisdiction to entertain the motion for leave to appeal. In short, that the applicant had compromised his right to appeal. The parties exchanged affidavits in relation to the motion.