1. ) GLOBALMARINER OFFSHORE SERVICES SDN BHD 2. ) TH HEAVY ENGINEERING BERHAD 1. ) 1. TH HEAVY ENGINEERING BERHAD 2. FLOATECH (L) LTD (Original Action) 2. ) 1. GLOBALMARINER OFFSHORE SERVICES SDN BHD 2. ZAHAR MOHD HASHIM BIN ZAINUDDIN 3. AB
Application dismissed because applicant failed to show a real danger of bias: counsel in the partnership dispute is not a party and his professional role does not implicate the judge; any financial consequences affect clients not counsel; the prospect the judge may be a witness is speculative; therefore applicant did not discharge the burden to establish a real danger of bias.
- Citation
- 22NCC-374-11/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Plaintiff (main Action); Defendant (counterclaim): Globalmariner Offshore Services Sdn Bhd; Defendant (main Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim): TH Heavy Engineering Berhad; Defendant (main Action): Floatech (L) Ltd; 4th Defendant (counterclaim); Applicant for Recusal: Nor Badli Munawir bin Mohamad Alias Latfi
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 8 June 2021
- Case Number
- 22NCC-374-11/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Division Recusal Application in Trial Proceedings / Application for Recusal Prior to Continuation of Trial
- Outcome
- Recusal application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Recusal, Apprehension of Bias, Judge's Code of Ethics, Appearance of Impropriety, Burden of Proof
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Globalmariner Offshore Services Sdn Bhd
Plaintiff (main Action); Defendant (counterclaim)
TH Heavy Engineering Berhad
Defendant (main Action); Plaintiff (counterclaim)
Floatech (L) Ltd
Defendant (main Action)
Nor Badli Munawir bin Mohamad Alias Latfi
4th Defendant (counterclaim); Applicant for Recusal
Procedural Posture
Commercial Division Recusal Application in Trial Proceedings / Application for Recusal Prior to Continuation of Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is a real danger of bias requiring recusal of the judicial officer
- 2 Whether the judge's involvement in a partnership dispute involving the judge's former firm creates an appearance of bias when counsel in that dispute appears before the judge
- 3 Whether speculative or confidential allegations without factual particularity satisfy the applicant's burden to show a real danger of bias
Ratio Decidendi
Application dismissed because applicant failed to show a real danger of bias: counsel in the partnership dispute is not a party and his professional role does not implicate the judge; any financial consequences affect clients not counsel; the prospect the judge may be a witness is speculative; therefore applicant did not discharge the burden to establish a real danger of bias.
Court Disposition
Recusal application dismissed
Orders
- Enclosure 358 dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment