Court rejects wireless service provider’s appeals in MCMC judicial review case

 Court of Appeal unanimously affirms the High Court's decision to set aside two ex parte leave orders granted to Asiaspace Broadband Sdn Bhd.

The Court of Appeal ordered Asiaspace Broadband Sdn Bhd to pay MCMC RM30,000 in costs.

PETALING JAYA:

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Asiaspace Broadband Sdn Bhd’s appeals arising from judicial review proceedings against the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

MCMC said a three-member bench, comprising Justices Azhahari Kamal Ramli, Nadzarin Wok Nordin and K Muniandy, unanimously upheld the High Court’s decision to set aside two ex parte leave orders.

The court also ordered Asiaspace to pay the commission a total of RM30,000 in costs.

According to MCMC, the proceedings concerned its regulatory decisions related to Asiaspace’s spectrum assignment and its proposed service rollout arrangements.

Abdul Ghani Abdullah.

Asiaspace is a Kuala Lumpur-based wireless broadband service provider. Abdul Ghani Abdullah is the founder and executive director of the Asiaspace group of companies.

Asiaspace had challenged MCMC’s decisions through the statutory appeal mechanism under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) while also seeking a judicial review before the High Court.

The High Court subsequently set aside two ex parte leave orders that had granted Asiaspace leave to commence judicial review proceedings, prompting the company to file separate appeals against each decision.

In dismissing the appeals, the Court of Appeal held that the statutory remedies available under the CMA must first be exhausted before judicial review proceedings could be commenced.

The court found no exceptional circumstances that justified departing from that requirement, MCMC said.

It also found that material information had not been fully disclosed when leave to commence the judicial review proceedings was sought.

The court further held that pursuing judicial review proceedings while statutory appeals concerning the same subject matter were ongoing amounted to an abuse of the court process.

“The decision reinforces the importance of observing the statutory appeal framework established under the CMA before recourse is made to a judicial review,” MCMC said in a statement. - FMT