SURIANI KEMPE & 6 OTHERS KERAJAAN MALAYSIA & 2 OTHERS

SURIANI KEMPE & 6 OTHERS KERAJAAN MALAYSIA & 2 OTHERS

The strike‑out application under Order 18 r.19 is dismissed: the 1st plaintiff association has sufficient interest to sue, the originating summons raises an arguable constitutional challenge to Article 14(1)(b)/Second Schedule implicating Article 8 equality, and the issue requires full consideration rather than summary dismissal; defendants bear the onus to justify the gender‑based distinction in citizenship provisions.

Citation
WA-24NCVC-2356-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintif Pertama: Suriani Kempe; Plaintif Kedua: Myra Eliza binti Mohd Danil; Plaintif Ketiga: Adlyn binti Adam Teoh; Plaintif Keempat: Vimala Devi a/p Muniappan; Plaintif Kelima: Choong Wai Li; Plaintif Keenam: Ng Mei Mei; Plaintif Ketujuh: Rekha Sen Mei-Mei; Defendan Pertama: Kerajaan Malaysia; Defendan Kedua: Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia; Defendan Ketiga: Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 May 2021
Case Number
WA-24NCVC-2356-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge (originating Summons Concerning Citizenship Provisions) / Interlocutory — Strike‑out Application Under Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012
Outcome
Defendants' application to strike out the originating summons under Order 18 r.19 dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 14(1)(b) Citizenship, Article 8 Equality, Locus Standi, Strike Out (order 18 R.19), Declaratory Relief, Legitimate Expectation
Source Language
Malay/English
Constitutional Law Citizenship Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Societies Law Article 14(1)(b) Citizenship Article 8 Equality Locus Standi +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suriani Kempe

Plaintif Pertama

Myra Eliza binti Mohd Danil

Plaintif Kedua

Adlyn binti Adam Teoh

Plaintif Ketiga

Vimala Devi a/p Muniappan

Plaintif Keempat

Choong Wai Li

Plaintif Kelima

Ng Mei Mei

Plaintif Keenam

Rekha Sen Mei-Mei

Plaintif Ketujuh

Kerajaan Malaysia

Defendan Pertama

Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia

Defendan Kedua

Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, Malaysia

Defendan Ketiga

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge (originating Summons Concerning Citizenship Provisions) / Interlocutory — Strike‑out Application Under Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st plaintiff association has locus standi to bring the originating summons
  2. 2 Whether Article 14(1)(b) read with Part II Second Schedule is discriminatory vis-à-vis Article 8 of the Federal Constitution
  3. 3 Whether the originating summons discloses a reasonable cause of action or is scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The strike‑out application under Order 18 r.19 is dismissed: the 1st plaintiff association has sufficient interest to sue, the originating summons raises an arguable constitutional challenge to Article 14(1)(b)/Second Schedule implicating Article 8 equality, and the issue requires full consideration rather than summary dismissal; defendants bear the onus to justify the gender‑based distinction in citizenship provisions.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application to strike out the originating summons under Order 18 r.19 dismissed

Orders

  • Application to strike out under Order 18 Rule 19 dismissed
  • Originating Summons permitted to proceed for full adjudication; defendants must justify distinctions in citizenship provisions