8 Trial days
There were only eight trial days over the 25 years it took for a case to go from the High Court to the Federal Court.
The case began in 1979 at the Kuantan high court. Businessman Ng Kim Thin and his wife were granted a valid licence to occupy a land under lease from the State Government. In violation of the lease agreement, the state authorities demolished their property and evict them. The couple sued the land authorities of Pahang for breach of contract and claim specific damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages.
How much is 25 years of waiting for justice worth? RM350,000 plus interest for all those years, says businessman Ng Kim Thin, 65. He won the case in the Federal Court yesterday against land authorities in Pahang for demolishing their property located on temporary occupation licence land.
Ng's lawyer Shakuntala Sharma said there were numerous delays due to a host of factors. "I was young, enthusiastic and idealistic at that time. I’ve really grown old on this file," Shakuntala said. According to Shakuntala, it took 17 years from filing of the case to judgment in the Kuantan High Court.
What? Disposal up to the stage at high court takes 17 years?
"The hearing started before Kuantan High Court Judge Datuk Shaikh Daud Ismail in May 1984. When he was transferred following a promotion, there was a four-year gap before Tan Sri Lamin Yunus took over in May 1988," she said. In November 1994, the plaintiff submitted written submissions but it was not until December 1997 that Lamin delivered his judgment.
Ng filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal in December 1997 which was heard and dismissed in May 2003. The Federal Court; the court of last resort, finally delivered the judgment in their favor yesterday. And for the 25 years wait, Ng gets RM350,000 actual cost of damages, plus interest.
Shakuntala finds it "quite disgraceful" that her clients had to wait 25 years for a judgment from the Federal Court. She was disappointed with the Federal Court decision as it came with several restrictions in the nature of damage and claims the plaintiffs could seek.
"The judge ruled that we could only seek actual loss and damages (damages for equipment, machinery and products that were destroyed)," she said. This means that her clients will not be able to seek aggravated damages, punitive damages and damages for loss of income.
Oh..... What an effective system we had!!!!!. The appallent may have died before the outcome of the case conclude. With God's blessing, he lived till today to receive RM350,000 as compensation, while he will have to pay his lawyer about half of the award.
Welldone! Malaysia's Key Performance Index! My foot! Pak Lah, did you read the subject issue? What say you?
No comments:
Post a Comment