Noorlaili Binti Aziz

On the court record

Noorlaili Binti Aziz appears in the corpus across commercial, family and forfeiture litigation, argued in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan). One matter, appearing for the plaintiff, was a commercial claim against a state economic development corporation in which, after trial, the court dismissed the whole of the plaintiff's claim and allowed part of the defendant's counterclaim, ordering costs — the 'Mahkamah ini telah menolak keseluruhan tuntutan Plaintif' (this court dismissed the entirety of the plaintiff's claim) while allowing the counterclaim in part. A second matter, appearing for the petitioner, was a divorce petition brought by a wife against her husband, seeking the dissolution of the marriage on the ground of marital breakdown together with financial relief — maintenance, a claim for the husband to purchase a house for her to reside in, and medical expenses — and turning on whether she was entitled to monthly or lump-sum maintenance, the husband's duty to provide maintenance under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, and the husband's financial capacity. A third matter, in the Court of Appeal and appearing for the appellant, was an application for an order of certiorari to quash a Notice of release of property that had been seized under section 60(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, and to quash the decisions of the investigating officer and the Deputy Public Prosecutor in issuing the notices of release and the accompanying instructions. The forfeiture matter is a reminder that decisions to release seized property are as capable of challenge as decisions to seize it, and that a party who says property should have remained frozen may seek to quash the very notice by which it was released. Across the appearances the practice ranges over commercial trial work, matrimonial and maintenance disputes under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, and the judicial review of decisions to release property seized under the anti-money-laundering legislation.