Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Federal Court ruling, Vexatious litigation for TH and

The day new management of Tabung Haji (TH) made police reports against previous management puzzled many corporate watcher and market players.

Usually before such actions, there would be internal enquiries, right to reply, and various due process within the organisation to ascertain anything tantamount to a crime.

The new management of TH came in and vavoom came swiftly the series of police reports.

Perhaps, the new management may got the go-ahead from someone up above. Quite sure the tasking was meant to be done properly and in accordance with due process.

However, Malaysia Baru is a strange time in our history. It is similar to Robespierre era after the French Revolution. After the American Civil War, there were carpet baggers streaming down south.

If new management made their case to Tun Dr Mahathir, the politician par excellence and supreme political animal would be motivated by politics and instruct to go for former Chirman, Dato Seri Azeez Raheem.

The police report was full of fanfare but Azeez alleged offense involving Yayasan Tabung Haji was minor as no money was stolen and it went to a good cause.

Someone at lower management level were complacent to miss out and not advise management an important clause in the Deed of Trust.

It is easy to be suspicious as to why the other m*the®f^ck€rs not charged together?

For the public fanfare for only police reports, the 24-year economy writer for need be aware that there is justification in this blogger's concern on the improper manner and suspiciously manipulative ways the whole turnaround attempt of TH is being handled.

The heck with Azeez but the others are being victimised.

Revealing police report

This is a piece of news from The Malay Mail Online two weeks ago:
Going public with police report can amount to defamation, Federal Court rules

Published 1 week ago on 01 February 2019

PUTRAJAYA, Feb 1 — The Federal Court ruled on Wednesday that a person who lodges a police report could be held accountable for defamation if he or she repeats the contents of the report to the public. 
Justice Tan Sri Azahar Mohamed said subsequent publication of the contents of a police report by its maker to the public was not protected by the defence of absolute privilege save where the contents of the report were made in or in connection with judicial proceedings.

In his 15-page judgment, he said there was no public policy consideration to recognise that once the police report was absolutely privileged it remained so at whatever occasion it was subsequently published.

“The right of the maker of the police report to speak and write freely to the public at large cannot override an individual’s interest in protecting his reputation,” said Justice Azahar, who delivered the judgment of a five-man bench in a defamation lawsuit brought against actress Zahida Mohamed Rafik.

He said the absolute-privilege defence must at some point give way to protection against reputational damage.

Justice Azahar said it would result in persons irresponsibly slandering others with impunity if the defence of absolute privilege was extended to cover the subsequent publication of the contents of the police report to the world at large.

He said that in the present case, Zahida did not offer justification or explanation why it was necessary or reasonable for her to repeat the contents of the police report at a press conference.

However, he said, although the court answered the legal question pertaining to absolute privilege in favour of Zahida’s former driver, Noor Azman Azemi, it would not affect the result of his appeal.

In dismissing Noor Azman’s appeal with no order as to costs, Justice Azahar said no serious miscarriage of justice had occurred. Noor Azman had appealed against the Court of Appeal decision which set aside the RM150,000 damages awarded to him by the High Court in his defamation suit against Zahida.

Noor Azman, a driver for a private company, would also have to return RM200,000 to Zahida as the Federal Court had upheld a Court of Appeal decision on her counter-claim against him (Noor Azman).

Read on here for background of case. 
This report essentially is saying it is wrong and defamatory to leak and reveal police report to local and foreign media and shame the affected persons.

Azeez maybe evil and stand being accused of various offenses, but a police report means that he has yet to be ascertain as guilty by any court.

Save your prejudice, because a media blitz to shame him using police report is wrong. The other lesser beings is wrong.

Vexatious litigation

Wikipedia described vexatious litigation as follows:
Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.
There have been many such cases in Malaysia. An examples below involves people and lawyers with some familiarity with this blogger.

The Star reported on July 20, 2011 on Matthias Chang. Extract below:
...Amex’s lawyer Prakash Menon said High Court Judicial Commissioner Dr Prasad Sandosham Abraham had on Friday declared Chang as a “vexatious litigant”.

“This is due to the application by Amex to obtain the declaration. The court could grant the declaration if the applicant (Amex) can prove that the defendant has persistently and habitually filed claims against the same or different people without reasonable cause,” Prakash said when contacted yesterday.

Prakash said Amex had filed the application on March 5 last year to get the declaration.

In the application, he said, the credit card company applied for the court to restrain Chang from filing any proceeding against Amex arising from the judgment which they obtained in 2005 without the leave of the judge.

When asked to elaborate, Prakash said that “numerous cases and applications arising from the judgment over his failure to settle his credit card debts had all been dismissed by the courts.”
The legal discussion on the case and another involving Perak Industrial Corporation Sdn Bhd can be found in the blog of MESSRS S. S. TIEH, ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS here.

A renown lawyer, Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos wrote on this abuse of the court process in The Malay Mail Online in 2016 here.

If there is a trend of similar series of actions involving Yati, Zukri and Empress Dowager, they may have committed vexatious litigation.

Justified cause

Based on these two, this blogger has justified cause to be concerned. It is beyond the thrill of being a "dalang". The concern with happenings at Tabung Haji is genuine.

See video of other concerned party below:

They are not satisfied with the news report on the SPV, which mainstream reporter and also online media gobbled up hook, line and sinker from this taklimat made easy for editor and reporters "rakan" (aligned) to new management.

What you see is what you find being churned out by the media without critical analysis and questions being asked.

Mowardi should refer to what we asked n the previous posting with regard to below:

Was hoping a response on behalf of client. Make their money worth. It is your's and our money in TH too. 

Quite sure now someone will jump to suspect Azeez as my dalang. Bodoh punya orang! 

No comments:

My Say