PUTRAJAYA, Oct 18 — The Federal Court will not hold a fresh hearing on the "bin Abdullah” case as scheduled today, but can proceed straight to judgment.

Chief Justice Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, chairing a new panel set up for the rehearing, called it off, saying the apex court had sufficient coram to make a decision despite the retirement of two of the judges on the previous five-man Bench.

"We still have three [judges], so can go on with the judgment. Otherwise some may say it’s a second bite at the cherry for some parties,” he said in court.

He explained that when the matter came up for case management previously, it was thought there would only be two judges left out of the original five on the Bench —  which meant there would be an insufficient coram to rule on the matter.

An odd number of judges are required to sit and decide on a dispute at the appellate and federal level, to ensure a majority decision.

Malanjum had said it was not known initially if Federal Court judge Datuk Seri Balia Yusof Wahi, who was one of those on the five-man panel, would have ended his tenure.

The five-man panel had completed hearing the case on February 7 and said the decision would be delivered at a date to be fixed later.

The five-man panel’s chair, then Chief Justice Tun Md Raus Sharif, resigned in July.

Federal Court judge Tan Sri Hasan Lah was due to retire at age 66 on March 3 but was granted a six-month extension allowed under the Federal Constitution until September 2, while it was not known initially if Balia Yusof would retire on September 25 or receive a six-month extension as well.

The other judges in the five-man panel were the then Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop and Tan Sri Aziah Ali.

K. Shanmuga, a lawyer for the Johor Muslim couple who were seeking to remove the illegitimacy tag of "bin Abdullah” from their child’s name, said the legal team had thought a rehearing was required.

"We had assumed when the first case management had been fixed, that there had been no majority at that time.

"If there had been no majority at (the time of) the case management, then a rehearing is in order,” he told the court.

Malanjum, who had proposed that no rehearing was required, then said the three remaining judges on the initial panel would decide.

"Let the former panel deliver the decision under Section 78,” Malanjum said.

Section 78(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 provides that the remaining judges in a panel would deliver the judgment or reserved judgment, if any of the panel's judges was unable to attend or exercise his functions.

Section 78(2) of the same law further states that decisions are to be made based on the opinion of the majority of the remaining judges, but "if there is no majority, the proceeding shall be reheard”.

In line with Malanjum’s reform of having seven-man panels inclusive of the top four judges to hear public interest cases at the Federal Court, President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Ahmad Maarop, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zaharah Ibrahim and Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Datuk David Wong Dak Wah were also on the panel today.

The other Federal Court judges on the panel are Datuk Seri Balia Yusof Wahi, Datuk Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin, Datuk Mohd Zawawi Salleh.

Today was scheduled to be the fresh hearing of the National Registration Department’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s order for it to drop "bin Abdullah” from the name of the child of the Johor Muslim couple.

On September 3, 2015, the Johor Muslim couple — given the initials of M.E.M.K and N.A.W — and their child had filed the lawsuit against the NRD, the NRD director-general and the government of Malaysia to seek the change of the "bin Abdullah” patronym to the father’s name in the birth certificate.

The High Court had on August 4, 2016 ruled that the NRD director-general’s refusal to change the "bin Abdullah” patronym in the birth certificate of the Johor Muslim couple's child was lawful.

But the Court of Appeal had on May 25, 2017 unanimously delivered a landmark ruling that quashed the NRD director-general’s decision to use "bin Abdullah”, also ordering the official to correct the patronym in the birth certificate as the father’s wishes to have his name used could not be overridden.

The Johor Islamic Religious Council which is an intervener in the lawsuit was represented today by five lawyers including Datuk Sulaiman Abdullah and Datuk Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, while the Selangor Islamic Religious Council acting as amicus curiae or friends of the court were represented by two lawyers.

The Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council and 41 parents ― who are also affected NRD’s policy of using "bin Abdullah” for Muslim illegitimate children ― were also previously allowed to be amicus curiae, but no lawyers appeared for them today.

Lawyer Goh Siu Lin held a watching brief today for the Bar Council, while several lawyers including Hafez Zalkapli also held a watching brief for the Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia (PPMM).