PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA v DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HJ ABD RAZAK

01i-12-05-2025w Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 12 August 2025 • 01(i)-12-05/2025(W) • 52 min read

17 cases cited (2 SG, 15 foreign)

Catchwords

Judicial Review - Leave stage - Attorney General's role under o.53 r 3(3) ROC 2012 - Whether duty to confirm or disclose documents - Burden of proof for disputed evidence - Distinction between procedural and respondent roles. Fresh Evidence - Application at appellate stage - Rule 7 (3A) RCA 1994 - Whether codifies or displaces Ladd v Marshall - Threshold of "determining influence" vs "important influence". Constitutional Law - Royal pardon - Judicial review of Pardons Board decision - Whether justiciable - Whether fresh evidence may be introduced to challenger pardon under Article 42 Federal Constitution. Appellate Procedure - Admission of additional evidence - Interpretation and scope of Rule 7(3A) - Compatibility with common law principles.

Practice Areas

Judicial Review

Judges (3)

Hanipah binti Farikullah Coram Hasnah binti Dato' Mohammed Hashim Coram Zabariah binti Mohd Yusof Delivered

Counsel (16)

Attorney General's Chambers Firm Shafee & Co. Firm Ahmad Hanir bin Hambaly @ Arwi Counsel Appellant Ainna Sherina binti Saipolamin Counsel Appellant Mohd Hafeez bin Rahim Counsel Respondent Muhammad Farhan bin Muhammad Shafee Counsel Respondent Naresh a/l Mayachandran Counsel Respondent Nur Syafiqah binti Mohd Sofian Counsel Respondent Nurhafizza bt Azizan Counsel Appellant Safiyyah binti Omar Counsel Appellant Shamsul Bin Bolhassan Counsel Appellant Siti Nurfarhana Muhammad Azmi Counsel Appellant Tan Sri Dato' Mohd Dusuki bin Mokhtar Counsel Appellant Tan Sri Dr. Muhammad Shafee bin Abdullah Counsel Respondent Tharrence Anthony Counsel Respondent Wan Muhammad Arfan bin Wan Othman Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA Appellant Dato' Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Hj Abd Razak Respondent

Case Significance

PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA v DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HJ ABD RAZAK is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated August 12, 2025 (citation: 01i-12-05-2025w). <p>The Attorney General appealed against the Court of Appeal's decision granting Dato' Sri Mohd Najib leave for judicial review of a Royal Pardon decision, and allowing the admission of additional evidence. The Federal Court dismissed both appeals, holding that the Ladd v Marshall principles apply but Rule 7(3A) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal modifies the threshold, and that the case should proceed to substantive judicial review before a new High Court judge. The case was remitted to the Hi The panel comprised Hanipah binti Farikullah, Hasnah binti Dato' Mohammed Hashim and Zabariah binti Mohd Yusof, with Zabariah binti Mohd Yusof delivering the judgment.

Summary

The Attorney General appealed against the Court of Appeal's decision granting Dato' Sri Mohd Najib leave for judicial review of a Royal Pardon decision, and allowing the admission of additional evidence. The Federal Court dismissed both appeals, holding that the Ladd v Marshall principles apply but Rule 7(3A) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal modifies the threshold, and that the case should proceed to substantive judicial review before a new High Court judge. The case was remitted to the High Court.

What was the outcome of PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA v DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HJ ABD RAZAK?

<p>The Attorney General appealed against the Court of Appeal's decision granting Dato' Sri Mohd Najib leave for judicial review of a Royal Pardon deci...

Statutes Cited

Court of Judicature Act 1964

s 69(3)

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)

s 69(3)

Federal Constitution

Art 42 Art 42(5)

Rules of Court 2012

Supreme Court of Judicature Act

s 59(4)

Cases Cited (17)

SG (1)

[2019] SGCA 41

SLR (1)

[2013] 2 SLR 880

UK (9)

[1954] 3 All ER 745 [1960] 1 WLR 249 [2000] 1 WLR 2318 [2006] EWCA Civ 1123 [2011] 2 AC 304 [2011] EWCA Civ 1534 [2011] EWCA Civ 599 [2021] EWCA Civ 113 [2024] EWCA Civ 28

MY (6)

[1970] 2 MLJ 70 [1979] 2 MLJ 170 [1980] 2 MLJ 142 [1995] 1 MLJ 28 [1995] 2 MLJ 442 [2002] 4 MLJ 529