[2017] 1 MLJ A Michael Philip Spears v Ketua Pengarah Penjara Kajang & Anor and another appeal (Varghese George JCA) 485 [39] The fact that the appellant was suffering from a serious mental disorder was conceded by learned senior federal counsel. The fresh evidence adduced, namely the Medical Board of the appellant from Hospital Bahagia, Ulu Kinta evidenced the further fact that the appellant had been diagnosed with ‘schizophrenia’ even as early as or about the 6 December 2004. B C [40] There was therefore, in our assessment, a sufficiently plausible and arguable case made out by the appellant and on that account the appellant should not have been summarily denied the right to be heard fully on his suit, as was done here when the respondents’ application to strike out the action was allowed by the court below. CONCLUSION D E F [41] As discussed and elaborated above, we were satisfied that the issues raised in the suit were justiciable in that the court had the necessary jurisdiction to deal with the suit, and that the appellant had sufficiently shown an arguable case to have the suit ordered to proceed to trial. [42] Accordingly it was our decision that the suit be reinstated and remitted back to the High Court for full trial. [43] With respect to Appeal No W-01(IM)(NCVC)-287–07 of 2014 it followed that the appeal therein ought to also be allowed and an order in terms of prayer (2) of encl 4 (High Court) be granted to the appellant. We so ordered. [44] No order was made as to costs. The deposits were ordered to be refunded to the appellant. G Appeals allowed; suit reinstated and remitted back to High Court for full trial. Reported by Dzulqarnain Ab Fatar H I