Guiding Principles

1. Dato’ Raja Ideris bin Raja Ahmad & Ors v Teng Chang Khim (Chairman of the select Committee on Competence, Accountability and Transparency and the Chairman of the Committee of Rights and Privileges State Legislative Assembly of Selangor) & Ors [2012] 5 MLJ 490

1.1. Court has power to grant declaratory relief in respective

2. court will not decide academic or hypothetical questions. The court has the jurisdiction to grant a declaration irrespective of whether the application has a cause of action or not

3. The plaintiff must have real and genuine interest in the subject matter of the proceedings

3.1. Tan Sri Haji Othman Saat v Mohamed bin Ismail [1982] 2 MLJ 177

3.2. Tenaga Nasional Bhd v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2016] MLJU 871

4. The plaintiff must have locus standi to bring the action

4.1. The plaintiff must be clothed with locus standi

4.1.1. Traditional test: Boyce v Paddington Borough Council [1903] 1 Ch 109

4.2. No court shall make any such declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration or title, omits to do so. There should be no undue delay in applying for declaratory relief

4.2.1. Kredin v YTF Investments [1998] 1 MLJ 46

5. There must exist a real controversy for the court to resolve

6. The person whose interest is to be affected should be before the court/the defendant must be a person having a proper and tangible interest in opposing the plaintiff’s claim

7. Definition

7.1. Technical

7.1.1. 1. A judge determine (declaratory judgement) of parties’ rights

7.2. Relief

8. Literal

9. The granting of this specific relief has to be made after considering the evidence & submissions given by both parties

9.1. Amalan Tepat Sdn Bhd v. Pan Flex Sdn Bhd [2011] 5 MLJ 512

9.2. Haris Fatillah B Mohd Ibrahim v Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya Malaysia [2017] MLJU 45

10. Declaratory order is not extended to moral, social, political, religious rights

11. J

12. Goh Joon v Kerajaan Negeri Johor [1998] AMEJ 1004; [1998] 7 MLJ 621

13. Law Kiat Long & Ors v Pardons Board Johore & Ors [1968] 2 MLJ 249

14. Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v British Bank for Foreign Trade [1921] 2 AC 438

15. Court would generally grant a declaration if there is no alternative remedy available

16. Dato Syek Kechik bin Syed Mohamed v Government of Malaysia [1979] 2 MLJ 101

17. Ik Ngi Piau & Anor v The Federal Court of Malaysia [2017] MLJU 319

17.1. The court must have jurisdiction and power to award the remedy . If there is no jurisdiction, there is no power The power to make a binding declaration of right is a discretionary power

17.2. Jurisdiction of the court to grant declaratory orders is not excluded unless the remedy available in the alternative tribunal is exhaustive

17.2.1. Government of Malaysia v Rohaya bt Mohd Majzub & Ors [1989] 1 MLJ 96

18. Tenaga Nasional Bhd v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2016] MLJU 871

19. The power of the court under O.15 r.16 is confined to making declaratory orders on legal and equitable rights An applicant for declaratory relief under should first show that he or she is “entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property” (Legal Entitlement)

19.1. Diesel SpA v Bontton Sdn Bhd [2016] MLJU 1350

19.2. The court has the jurisdiction to grant declaration as to rights depending on future events, but generally it is not the practice of the court (exercised with very considerable reserve)

20. The court must have jurisdiction and power to award the remedy

21. The proceedings must involve a “right”