KAMARUDDIN BIN ABD RAHIM [ ]

KAMARUDDIN BIN ABD RAHIM [ ]

Because the Court of Appeal dismissed the stay application, any High Court stay application became academic; the High Court had previously afforded adjournments to enable the accused to seek a stay at appellate level, and further attempts to relitigate the stay in the High Court amounted to an abuse of process; section 100 prevents automatic stay absent appellate order; accordingly the stay application was struck out and the trial continued.

Citation
AA-44-53-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant/accused: Kamaruddin bin Abd Rahim; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 September 2022
Case Number
AA-44-53-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (murder) / High Court Trial at Defence Stage; Application to Stay Struck Out; Appeal to Court of Appeal Pending/decided on Stay
Outcome
Stay application struck out; High Court trial to proceed and defence stage concluded with written submissions and oral closing submissions scheduled.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Recusal of Judge, Abuse of Process, Discharge/withdrawal of Counsel, Section 302 Penal Code, Section 425 CPC, Section 100 Courts of Judicature Act 1964
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Procedure Judicial Administration Appeal Stay of Proceedings Recusal of Judge Abuse of Process Discharge/withdrawal of Counsel Section 302 Penal Code +2 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kamaruddin bin Abd Rahim

Applicant/accused

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal (murder) / High Court Trial at Defence Stage; Application to Stay Struck Out; Appeal to Court of Appeal Pending/decided on Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should stay an ongoing trial pending disposal of an appeal against a recusal order
  2. 2 Whether repeated or collateral stay applications amount to abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal's dismissal of a stay application renders any subsequent High Court stay application academic

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Court of Appeal dismissed the stay application, any High Court stay application became academic; the High Court had previously afforded adjournments to enable the accused to seek a stay at appellate level, and further attempts to relitigate the stay in the High Court amounted to an abuse of process; section 100 prevents automatic stay absent appellate order; accordingly the stay application was struck out and the trial continued.

Court Disposition

Stay application struck out; High Court trial to proceed and defence stage concluded with written submissions and oral closing submissions scheduled.

Orders

  • HC Stay Application (Enclosure 287 in AA-45B-5-04/2018; refiled as Enclosure 1 in AA-44-53-08/2022) struck out
  • Proceedings to continue; defence case concluded on 27 September 2022