Chapter 12.4 - Contempt Proceedings

Question 1

CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

Overview

Answer 1

1) Mode & by whom
2) Standard of proof
3) Initiation of contempt proceedings

Question 2

CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

Mode & by whom

Answer 2

Arthur Lee Meng Kwang v Faber Merlin:

• Mode: Motion
• By whom: private party w sufficient himself/AG/the court itself.

Question 3

CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

Standard of proof

Answer 3

Wee Choo Keong v MBF Holdings:

• facts must be proved beyond reasonable doubt;
• any benefits of doubt ought to go to the person charged.

Question 4

INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

Overview

Answer 4

1) who
2) must act promptly
3) specify nature of alleged contempt

Question 5

INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

who

Answer 5

1) Who - O.52, r.5 + Arthur Lee Meng Kwang v Faber Merlin:

• AG or any private party who has sufficient interest in the matter;
• the court itself.

2) Whether MY BAR has sufficient locus - Malaysian Bar v Tan Sri Dato’ Abd Hamid Omar:

• it is questionable;
• the test: sufficient interest;
• test in LKS v Govt of Malaysia is to be observed.

Question 6

INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

must act promptly

Answer 6

Malaysian Bar v Tan Sri Dato Abd Hamid Omar:

• unexplained delay of 9 months is an inordinate delay;
• as allegation for contempt is a serious matter, it should have been pursued within a reasonable matter.

Question 7

INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

specify the nature

Answer 7

Lee Chan Leong v Jurutera Consultant SEA Sdn Bhd:

• the notice to show cause to the contemnor must specify any misconduct or criminality of the contemnor requiring an answer.
• these are essential ingredients in summary proceedings for contempt.
• failure render the proceedings a nullity & void as it is in breach of rules of natural justice.