Emails sent to you weekly with the latest updates on the law.
-
MAMAT ADAM lwn. MOHD ABDULLAH MOHAMED [2015] 2 SMC 56
MAHKAMAH MAJISTRET, TANAH MERAH
LUKMAN HAKIM ABU BAKAR SEDIK MJ
[KES SIVIL NO: 73-05-2010]
20 NOVEMBER 2014PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman - Penghakiman ingkar - Pengenepian - Permohonan untuk - Sama ada penghakiman yang diperolehi teratur - Sama ada defendan mempunyai pembelaan bermerit - Sama ada jumlah penghakiman dipertikaikan - Sama ada defendan menerima penghakiman bermeterai - Sama ada terdapat kelewatan memfailkan permohonan ini - Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 42 k. 13
-
DATO' HAMZAH ABDUL MAJID v. OMEGA SECURITIES SDN BHD [2015] 9 CLJ 677
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
AHMAD MAAROP FCJ, JEFFREY TAN FCJ, ABU SAMAH NORDIN FCJ, ZAHARAH IBRAHIM FCJ
[CIVIL NO APPEAL: 02-68-09-2014]
4 NOVEMBER 2015SECURITIES: Shares - Trading account - Margin trading facility - Claim for contra losses on transactions - Unpleaded defence - Defence that facility was a loan transaction raised during cross-examination - Whether a radical departure from pleaded case - Whether mere variation, modification or development - Whether trial judge rightly rejected defence of loan - Whether principle in Superintendent of Lands and Surveys (4th Div) & Anor v. Hamit bin Matusin & Ors applicable
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal to Federal Court - Questions of law - Claim for contra losses on share transactions - Unpleaded defence that facility was a loan transaction raised during cross-examination - Whether elements of loan existed - Whether defence of loan a radical departure from pleaded case - Whether court could reject evidence thereof on account that it was not pleaded - Whether principle in Superintendent of Lands and Surveys (4th Div) & Anor v. Hamit bin Matusin & Ors applicable
-
AZMI OSMAN v. PP & ANOTHER APPEAL [2015] 9 CLJ 845
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
BALIA YUSOF WAHI JCA, ROHANA YUSUF JCA, ABANG ISKANDAR JCA
[CRIMINAL APPEALS NO: J-09-27-01-2014 & J-09-28-01-2014]
29 SEPTEMBER 2015JURISDICTION: High Court - Coordinate jurisdiction - Whether one High Court Judge could overrule another High Court Judge - Whether High Court was carrying out appellate jurisdiction - Jurisdiction to correct error - Whether lies with Court of Appeal
CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 - Section 4 - Offence of knowingly engaging in proceeds of unlawful activity - Monies in large amounts credited into account of accused - Whether accused took steps to ascertain whether monies were proceeds of unlawful activity - Whether accused ought to have reason to believe that monies were illegal proceeds - Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001, ss. 3 & 4(1)(a)
CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 - Section 55 - Forfeiture of property seized in connection with offence - Third party notice under s. 61 - Appeal against issuance of third party notice - Whether third party notice determined with finality - Fate of property seized - Whether appeal premature
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - Close of prosecution's case - Whether judge expected to make firm finding of prima facie case or otherwise - Whether open for judge to delve into doubt by offering alternative views - Whether contravened s. 316 of Criminal Procedure Code
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentencing - Multiple charges - Whether facts relating to charges justified invocation of 'same transaction' principle - Whether proximity of time existed - Whether interest of public given paramount consideration
-
CASE(S) HIGHLIGHT
Uber rape case: Cab driver Shiv Kumar Yadav found guilty, faces life imprisonment
More than 10 months after a 25-year-old woman was raped and sexually assaulted inside a radio taxi in the national capital, a fast-track court in Delhi Tuesday convicted cab driver Shiv Kumar Yadav, holding him guilty on charges of rape and endangering the life of the victim. Yadav, a former driver of Uber taxi service, faces a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
Read more Judgment Sentencing Decision
-
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHT
Board revokes registration of auditor in first such action
PETALING JAYA: The Audit Oversight Board (AOB) has revoked the registration of audit firm Wong Weng Foo & Co along with its managing partner, Wong Weng Foo and his partner, Abdul Halim Husin, in a first of such action by the body since its inception. In a statement yesterday, AOB said the revocation is under Section 31Q(1)(a)(B) of the Securities Commission Malaysia Act 1993 (SCMA) for failure to remain fit and proper to audit public interest entities. The Act gives AOB the power to revoke the registration of an auditor if the auditor contravenes condition of registrations imposed by the AOB under Section 31O(3) of the SCMA.
-
Supreme Court dismisses £85 parking ticket challenge
UK
Contract
New test for ‘take it or leave it’ consumer contracts
A motorist has lost his Supreme Court challenge against ‘unfair’ fines imposed by a car park, in a case which will set a precedent in consumer contracts law. Chip-shop owner Barry Beavis (pictured) took action after he was given an £85 ticket for overstaying a two-hour parking limit by almost an hour. His case was sent to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal ruled against him in April.
-
Poor man’s CRISTAL, CRISTALINO, found to infringe – the distinct relevance of reputation in assessing the likelihood of confusion in the UK and Australia?
AUSTRALIA
Intellectual property
Champagne house Roederer successfully sues for trade mark infringement
In a recent decision from Mrs Justice Rose, the famous champagne house Roederer has successfully sued J Garcia Carrion SA (JGC) for trade mark infringement. JGC’s use of CRISTALINO in respect of cava infringed Roederer’s registered mark CRISTAL. The outcome seems straightforward enough (though it is worth noting for completeness that the defendants were not represented at trial).
-
Wrongful dismissal: risks of trawling through an employee’s past
UK
Employment
Employer’s successful fishing expedition motivated by desire to avoid terms of contract
The case of Williams v Leeds United FC seems to show the benefits of so-called “fishing expeditions”, or trawling through an employee’s past to dig up grounds for dismissal. However, Andy Carruthers of Withers LLP sounds a note of caution for would-be private investigators and suggests that employers should take heed before casting their nets.
CASE(S) OF THE WEEK
