Clarification, "I can walk away"

SECURITY FOR COSTS 3

My friend who read my opinion on this subject suggested that I clarify, what I meant by saying that I could walk away from Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s “Order To Strike Out with Costs.”

This is fair comment and I think it is a good idea. In my discussion I found that logic, the Law and comment sense dictate that the application to “STRIKE OUT PETITION MUST PRECEED THE APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS; because for the judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali to decide what quantum of security is sufficient to secure the likely COURT COSTS that respondents will incur to defend their case CAN ONLY BE CALCULATED BY KNOWING WHAT THE ISSUES ARE IN THE SAID PETITION. Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali reduced the respondents’ application for the sum of RM.650,000 for security for costs to a more realistic sum of RM.60,000 is evidence that she had considered the issues supporting the said Petition; and the fact that judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali had made an ORDER THAT THE SUM OF RM.60,000 BE PAID INTO COURT is her statement that the likely costs for the trial of the petition is likely to be RM.60,000 because SECURITY FOR COSTS is only a contingent payment paid by the Petitioner if Petitioner wants the trial to proceed further; or she may choose not to proceed. If Petitioner chooses not to proceed, she can elect to “ABANDON” her Petition; she can just choose not to appear from that point. Respondents can then ask the court to order the dismissal of the petition with costs; then it will be up to respondents to come to Perth, Australia, to file a claim in our Perth Court for the likely sum of RM.250 ! Joke la ! THIS THEN IS WHAT I MEANT BY, “I can walk away from judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali; and it is to prevent this from happening that SECURITY FOR COSTS IS INTENDED.

From the logic of Law & common sense JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI DOES NOT HAVE THE POWER TO ORDER “STRIKE OUT WITH COSTS” and then to make another ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS OF RM.60,000. Common sense and logic dictates that the ORDER “to strike out” CANNOT EXIST together with the ORDER imposing SECURITY FOR COSTS (they exist together similar to the law of science, “LIKE POLES OF TWO MAGNETS REPEL EACH OTHER”). I really think judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali will not understand what this law of “two like poles of two magnets mean, but I cannot illustrate it better so I hope some one will explain to her. Actually, the idea is quite elementary, IF ZAINON STRIKE OUT SAID PETITION THEN THERE WILL NOT BE ANY TRIAL (the bloody petition does not exist anymore, so why ORDER THAT PETITIONER PROVIDE SECURITY FOR COSTS THAT WILL NOT EXIST BECAUSE THERE WILL NOT BE A TRIAL ? This conundrum is so elementary AND YET THIS JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI MISSED THEIR CONTRADICTION. I really cannot blame Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali too much because my wife’s counsel too did not see “THE CONTRADICTION”; he poo poof my argument, but judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali gets along with him quite famously; like minds think alike.


SIMPLE :WHEN PETITION IS STRUCK OUT WITH COSTS IT MEANS THAT THE PETITION DOES NOT EXIST ANY LONGER, THERE IS NO TRIAL, THEREFORE THERE IS NO COURT COSTS, AND THEREFORE THERE IS NO NEED FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS.

SIMPLE : ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS RM.60,000 MEANS THAT COURT COSTS FOR RESPONDENTS, AS ASSESSED BY JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI, HAVING CONSIDERED ALL THE ISSUES OF THE PETITION IS LIKELY TO BE RM.60,000. THIS MEANS THAT JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI HAVING CONSIDERED THE ISSUES OF THE CASE THINKS THAT THE COSTS WILL LIKELY TO BE RM.60,000. THIS IS EVIDENCE THAT JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI DOES NOT THINK THAT THE SAID PETITION LACKS A CAUSE OF ACTION.

Remember my analogy “LIKE POLES OF A MAGNET REPELS”. DO NOT BOTHER TO ASK JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI WHAT THAT MEANS, BECAUSE I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT SHE NEVER STUDIED SCIENCE; I will bet my pension on that.