Najib filed the application to strike out Pua’s suit on Feb 14, on grounds that he is not a civil servant as alleged by Pua in his statement of claim, and that the suit is also an abuse of the court process
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court will decide on Aug 3 on the application by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the government to strike out Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua’s suit over alleged misconduct in relation to the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) funds.
Judicial commissioner Datin Faizah Jamaludin fixed the date in chambers today after hearing submissions from Pua’s lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, Najib’s lawyer Tan Sri Cecil Abraham and senior federal counsel Alice Loke who represented the government.
Gobind when met after the proceedings said he had argued that the suit should go on as there is no merit in the application to strike out the claim.
“Our position is that he (Najib) is a public officer. We have put up a lengthy submission in support of the decision,” he said.
He added that the application by Najib and the government to dismiss the suit by his client was made on grounds that it did not properly disclose the cause of action for misfeasance of public office.
The hearing of the application was supposedly fixed to be held in chambers.
However, Faizah decided to hear the matter in open court since the chambers is too small to fit all the lawyers and had asked the media sitting at the public gallery to stay outside the courtroom.
Najib filed the application to strike out Pua’s suit on Feb 14, on grounds that he is not a civil servant as alleged by Pua in his statement of claim, and that the suit is also an abuse of the court process.
The government also filed an application to strike out the suit on March 2 on grounds that Pua has no locus standi to make the claim and that the suit is frivolous, vexatious and does not disclose a reasonable cause of action.
Pua sued the government and Najib on Jan 16 claiming that the PM committed misfeasance in public office involving 1MDB funds.
He is seeking general, aggravated and exemplary damages, costs, and other relief deemed fit by the court.
Source: NST Online