Federal Court Grants PKR Leave To Appeal In Zuraida's Bond Payment Reduction Case
The leave application was allowed by the Federal Court's three-panel judges comprising Tan Sri Nallini Pathmanathan, Datuk Nordin Hassan and Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, which is a prerequisite for matters proceeding to the Federal Court.
The appeal will centre on a single question of law, which was amended by the bench during today's hearing.
The question allowed to be argued in the substantive appeal is whether a party (A) to a financial bond, agrees to pay a certain sum of money as liquidated damages to (B) upon the happening of a certain event and; admits in a recital to such financial bond, that, the sum of money represented the value that (A) had received from (B), can have the court override such admission of fact and proceed to decide whether that sum constitutes reasonable compensation, taking into account the peculiar nature of the relationship between the parties.
On Dec 11 last year, the appellate court three-man bench led by Judge Datuk See Mee Chun upheld the High Court's ruling that Zuraida had breached the bond but reduced the quantum payment from RM10 million to RM100,000.
Previously, in Jun 23, 2023, the High Court in Kuala Lumpur ruled in favour of PKR and ordered Zuraida, who is the former Ampang Member of Parliament, to pay RM10 million in accordance with the bond's terms. The presiding judge, Datuk Akhtar Tahir, held that the bond was a valid and binding contract.
The lawsuit was initiated in 2020, by PKR's secretary-general Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, on behalf of the party, claiming Zuraida had violated the terms of a bond she signed before contesting in the 14th General Election in 2018.
Under the bond, among others, Zuraida was required to pay PKR RM10 million to the party within seven days if she resigned from PKR, joined another political party, or became an independent representative after being elected on the party's ticket.
In her defence, Zuraida contended that she was forced to sign the bond with the party to be able to stand for election as a candidate in the general election under the PKR banner.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Ignoring political 'interference' won't harm judiciary, says Tengku Maimun
KUALA LUMPUR: Attempts by politicians to interfere with the judiciary can be ignored with no impact on judicial independence, says former chief justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat. "But then again, it all depends on the judges," she said at a dialogue session titled "The Sanctity of Malaysia's Federal Constitution: Threats, Solutions and Impact on National Governance" here on Tuesday (Aug 19). 'There may be interference left, right, centre, but if you ignore (it), nothing will happen and the judiciary will remain intact and judicial independence will be upheld,' she added. Asked about threats to the judiciary during the question-and-answer session later, she replied, to applause and laughter: 'I'm sorry… but I would think that the biggest threat... would be the politicians. 'Perhaps I shouldn't elaborate." Tengku Maimun said that during her tenure as a judge in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court, she had never encountered any political interference. However, she acknowledged that 'there was a... semblance and attempted interference' towards the end of her tenure as the country's top judge. During her speech earlier, Tengku Maimun highlighted the crucial balance between judicial independence and collegiality within Malaysia's legal framework. She said these principles were important to maintain a fair and effective judiciary. Tengku Maimun explained that internal judicial independence is essential for judges to make decisions independently, free from undue influence by other judges, regardless of their rank. "Internal judicial independence refers to a judge's freedom to decide cases independently by applying one's... mind free from undue influence or control of other judges, particularly higher ranking or senior judges," she said. Tengku Maimun noted that collegiality plays a central role in appellate courts, where panels of judges deliberate on cases. This process ensures that diverse perspectives are considered, particularly when reviewing lower court judgments. "Collegiality and conferral among judicial panel members is a central (part) of the law and accountability as it ensures that every possible aspect of the case is considered," she said. Tengku Maimun clarified that judicial deliberations, which may involve disagreements and persuasive discussions, should not be confused with internal judicial interference. "What then happens is the judge who cannot agree is encouraged to write a fiscal judgment... if a judge disagrees with the outcome of (an) appeal, then he or she delivers a dissenting judgment or a separate judgment if he or she agrees with the outcome," she said. Also on the panel were Allianz Malaysia Bhd director Tan Sri Zainun Ali, Allianz Centre for Governance (ACG) director Zaharom Nain, ACG deputy director and principal research fellow Dr Syarifah Munirah Alatas, and National Human Rights Society (Hakam) past president Abdul Rashid Ismail. Tengku Maimun retired as chief justice on July 2 after being appointed to the position on May 2, 2019.
New Straits Times
an hour ago
- New Straits Times
Politicians biggest threat to judiciary, says Tengku Maimun
KUALA LUMPUR: Politicians are the biggest threat to the judiciary, said former chief justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat today. Speaking at the Allianz Centre for Governance's (ACG) Distinguished Speaker Series here, Tengku Maimun said she did not encounter political interference during her years as a High Court and Court of Appeal judge. However, she said there was "a semblance of attempted interference" towards the end of her career. "During my tenure in the High Court — never. During my tenure in the Court of Appeal — never. Unfortunately, towards the end of my tenure as CJ, there was a bit of a semblance of attempted interference," she said. "Personally, the biggest threat would be the politicians," she said, drawing laughter from the crowd. She was responding to a question from the audience on threats to the judiciary. Tengku Maimun added that attempts to influence judicial decisions would succeed only if judges allowed themselves to be swayed. "There may be interference left, right and centre, but if you ignore them, nothing will happen — the judiciary will remain intact and judicial independence will be upheld," she said. Tengku Maimun is the first woman to serve as Malaysia's chief justice. She took office in May 2019 and retired on July 1 this year.
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
Former CJ questions why police still cannot locate Indira's daughter
KUALA LUMPUR: The police should not have faced any significant challenge to execute a court order to locate the children of M. Indira Gandhi, says Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat. The former chief justice said she was unsure why police had yet to recover Indira's daughter Prasana Diksa, despite the case ongoing for years. "I personally think that there would be no obstacle for the police (stopping them from recovering the children). "Yet, more than 10 years down the line, they have not been located and returned to their mother," she said during a dialogue session here on Tuesday (Aug 19) titled "The Sanctity of Malaysia's Federal Constitution: Threats, Solutions and Impact on National Governance." Citing other high-profile cases, Tengku Maimun noted the police had successfully solved complex crimes, such as the murders of Sosilawati Lawiya and Altantuya Shaariibuu. "In both instances, despite significant logistical challenges, the perpetrators were apprehended and convicted," she said. She added that the judiciary's limitations in enforcing orders illustrate the separation of judicial and police responsibilities. Tengku Maimun also brought up her dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeal, which supported the Ipoh High Court's decision to issue a mandamus order against the police. This order demands police action to recover the children, a decision later upheld by the Federal Court. On Aug 11, the Court of Appeal postponed its decision in a RM100mil lawsuit filed by Indira against the Inspector-General of Police and three others concerning the alleged inaction against her ex-husband, Pathmanathan, over the abduction of her daughter, Prasana. The court has scheduled Aug 25 for case management to set a date to deliver the decision. Indira is appealing a High Court decision from June 28, 2024, which dismissed her lawsuit against the IGP, the police, the Home Ministry and the government, ruling that police used all available resources to locate Pathmanathan, also known as Muhammad Riduan. Indira's lawsuit, filed on Oct 28, 2020, claimed the IGP deliberately disregarded the Federal Court's mandamus order, failing to take appropriate action to return Prasana. She asserted that the defendants' actions caused her prolonged separation from her daughter. In 2009, Pathmanathan unilaterally converted his three children to Islam and obtained custody from the Syariah Court. In 2016, the Federal Court affirmed a High Court mandamus order to apprehend Pathmanathan and return Prasana to her mother. The apex court ruled in 2018 that the unilateral conversion was null and void, and the Ipoh High Court granted full custody to Indira in 2010. Prasana was 11 months old when taken and turned 17 this year. Indira's two other children were returned to her in 2010.
