IN THE MOOT COURT OF APPEAL OF UITM SHAH ALAM
IN THE STATE OF SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
APPEAL NO: W-007-TF OF 2011
MARIA MERCEDES …APPELLANT
ASPA LEE LAH …RESPONDENT
(In the matter of Civil Suit No: J-2627-EX 2011 in the
Moot High Court of UiTM Shah Alam in the State of Selangor Darul Ehsan)
Maria Mercedes …Plaintiff
Aspa Lee Lah …Defendant
1. Pedro Blanco and Aspa Lee Lah was a happily married couple, living in the luxurious neighbourhood of Mont Kiara. They have been together for 10 years on top of 7 years of courtship before.
2. Pedro earns a steady income in “Grouch R Us”, a consultant firm specialising in strategies for monopolising markets. Due to increasing competition from young upstarts at the firm, Pedro decided the only way to get ahead is to get a doctorate to boost his curriculum vitae. He then went ahead and applied to pursue a doctorate in Competition Law at London School of Law (LSL), much to the chagrin of Aspa when this was eventually relayed to her. Aspa herself is a practicing lawyer of 12 years experience with Beh, Lee Lah & Co, but despite her persistent and constant persuasion, she did not manage to convince Pedro to change his mind. It was with a heavy heart that she let Pedro leave for London.
3. It was in LSL that Pedro then met one Maria Mercedes, a curvaceous blonde with luscious lips and flowing locks that seemed a million miles apart from the cold and calculative Aspa. As Pedro spent more time with Maria, he further realised that this relationship would be good for his personal gain as well, seeing that Maria told him that she has numerous business contacts and Pedro could utilise that to bargain his way up in Grouch R Us.
4. Pedro is not known to be a swinging Casanova but there was just something about this Maria that led Pedro to leave behind his stoic beliefs and embrace this new found way of abandon. Maria even knew of the existence of Aspa and convinced Pedro that all will be well and asked him to divorce Aspa so that they can be together. Driven with lust and desire, Pedro went back and immediately filed for divorce, citing Aspa’s constant lack of attention and putting her work before their marriage life as the main reason. Pedro immediately instructed for divorce proceedings to be taken out, and predictably did not seem to have pondered the repercussions that would follow.
5. Shell-shocked, Aspa pondered on for days on what had befallen her until she stumbled across Pedro and Maria one day having lunch outside. Once Aspa found out about the adulterous affair between Pedro and Maria, her grief and sorrow quickly turned into anger and vengeance. She set out a scheme and formulated a plan to get even with the two lovebirds. Aspa followed Maria around, engaged private investigators to track her every day schedule and had nailed Maria’s daily habit to a tee. Eventually, she devised a clever way to seek revenge against the two of them after procuring enough information about Maria.
6. Aspa created a bogus Facebook account, using the pseudonym of one “Dr. Irwan Shah Abdullah”, purportedly a neurosurgeon currently based in Singapore, on the pretext of getting close to Maria and getting the necessary information for her to use in the divorce proceedings and to turn the table against Pedro. Aspa knew that Pedro would not find out about her doings as she knew very well Pedro is technologically illiterate, and would not have time to even bother with checking the online network.
7. Aspa used information relating to Maria’s personal life to make it appear as such that Maria had met “Dr. Irwan” before during one of the social events that Maria was accustomed to. Soon enough, what started as a fling had developed into something beyond, and Maria, the ever flirtatious one is overtly convinced that this Dr. Irwan would be able to provide more to her than Pedro could. Dr. Irwan seemed more poised, more assured in his future and it practically convinced Maria to leave Pedro. Once Maria had told Dr. Irwan of her current relationship with Pedro, Dr. Irwan had persuaded her to leave the “two timing dimwit”.
8. The online relationship went on until Aspa was confident that she had what was necessary for her to use the evidence of this infidelity by Pedro. She was overjoyed when she managed to convince Maria not to give some business to Pedro but to Dr. Irwan instead.
9. By the time the news broke that Dr. Irwan was just a sham, Maria had already cut ties with Pedro. Maria threw a fit and proceeded with filing a civil suit against Aspa for misrepresentation and inducement.
10. The matter was brought forth and furiously litigated before Alfonso Alejandro J (now JCA), known in the legal fraternity as one of, if not the most brilliant and outstanding judicial mind in the Commonwealth and one that has set numerous novel precedents through vigorous exercise of judicial activism. In August 2011, Alfonso Alejandro J delivered the following judgment:
“In the first place, Miss Aspa here is an advocate and solicitor. Surely she would be in a good position to appreciate that her actions are well within the law. I do not think that such an experienced practitioner of the legal fraternity would have fallen into such a rage of jealousy and would discard her ethical practices to pursue this personal vendetta of hers.
Let us take the first matter pleaded. Miss Maria claimed that there had been a misrepresentation in inducing her to believe the existence of this fictitious character. One that she only knew through some online social networking interface. One that she had voluntarily engaged with without any form of inducement whatsoever. She had taken upon herself to let a stranger befool and trick her into believing that this Dr. Irwan Shah exists and she was ready to abandon this Pedro chap in a split second. This cannot stand on the basis that misrepresentation can only be upheld if an existing fact was misrepresented. In this case, was the fact that this Dr. Irwan Shah is alive and well and intended to marry Miss Maria an existing fact? I believe the answer is in the negative, and I thereby dismiss the first prayer sought.
Secondly, Miss Maria claimed that Aspa had deliberately and knowingly induced her to break a contract. Let us examine the facts. Miss Maria had disclosed, again to a stranger at that point, that she is in the midst of agreeing a deal with MyGrouper Inc, to procure the right to bring in and market a new revolutionary office management software, Easy Office or as it is better known, Easy-O. Miss Maria revealed that she has orally agreed to give the project to Pedro to act as consultant for the matter, but had a change of heart when this Dr Irwan Shah said “he” had a better candidate and that they can snag a more handsome profit out of the transaction if she agreed to hand it over to Dr. Irwan instead. Again, I find no basis for Miss Maria to claim that this had amounted to an interference with the contract. It was a mere suggestion on the part of Dr. Irwan, or Miss Aspa, whichever way you look at it, and I hold that such statements are not one that is sufficient to sustain the prayer sought.
Above all, I find her behaviour totally deplorable and reek of opportunism. I am a strong believer in maintaining and protecting the holiness of a family institution and Miss Maria’s actions in causing the downfall of one is, in my regard, appalling.
I accordingly dismiss both claims of Miss Maria, with costs to be taxed. I am very well aware that this ruling has great implications as it involves a novel interpretation of the law, but one which I am reassuringly accustomed to. I am therefore allowing Miss Maria to file an appeal with the Moot Court of Appeal UiTM as matters of great public importance are at stake here. I am confident that my views are correct and that the appellate court would also agree with the findings that I have made.”
11. On 1st September 2011 Maria Mercedes filed an appeal with the Moot Court of Appeal UiTM on the following grounds:
11.1. That there was a tort of misrepresentation on the part of Aspa Lee Lah when Aspa Lee Lah deliberately and knowingly represented herself to be one “Dr. Irwan Shah Abdullah” for fraudulent purposes; and
11.2. That there was interference to a contract by Aspa Lee Lah when she caused Maria Mercedes to breach a contract with one Pedro Blanco.
1. Clarifications on the moot question can be submitted to the following email address:
2. The dateline for submission of clarifications:
Date : 15 October 2011
Time : 5.00 p.m.
3. Clarifications are only limited to the factual matrix contained in the moot question.
4. The full set of clarifications (if any) will be provided through the Moot Club, the manner of which will be informed at a later date