PUTRAJAYA: Parties to a dispute do not get what they apply for due to oversight by their lawyers, a Federal Court judge said.

Tan Sri Zaki Azmi said he was obliged to make such comments because the court had been repeatedly accused of being unfair to litigants when in fact parties themselves failed to file proper documents, make the right applications and be on time.

He made the remarks in his judgment that allowed an appeal by S. Manokaram to set aside a Court of Appeal ruling that Ranjid Kaur's application for division of matrimonial property could be heard although the couple's divorce had by then become absolute.

Zaki said Ranjid's counsel had overlooked the filing of the correct documents within the permitted time on a number of occasions during the proceedings.

He said it was not as if the lawyer concerned had interpreted the law differently.

"If there are authorities that support the respondent's action, perhaps the court could be sympathetic to her."

He said the result of all this oversight was injustice to the client.

He said Manokaram was under no duty to point out to Ranjid her errors and it was up to her lawyers to advise accordingly.

"More often than not, a divorce is acrimonious. Each party will try to extract from the divorce the most to his or her benefit," he said, adding that this case was one example where such situation had arisen.

He said he concurred with the judgment delivered by Datuk Ariffin Zakaria that the duty of the court was to interpret and apply the law.

"I sympathise with the respondent (Ranjid), but the law is the law."

He said there was no room to argue that the particular section of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 referred to by both parties should be interpreted in the way Ranjid had asked the apex court to do.