Forgot/Reset Password



  • CIMB BANK BHD v. AMBANK (M) BHD & ORS [2017] 9 CLJ 145
    [CIVIL APPEAL NO: 01(f)-20-06-2016(B)]
    16 AUGUST 2017

    LAND LAW: Indefeasibility of title and interests – Forged charge – Bank acquired property under forged documents – Whether bank an immediate or subsequent purchaser – Whether bank a holder of subsequent interest in property – Whether bank’s interest in property indefeasible – Whether chargee comes within meaning of purchaser under s. 340(3) of National Land Code

    Read more


    Trust dispute no bar to arbitration


    Adopt broad, liberal and flexible approach in construing arbitration agreements
    The plaintiffs (the Growers), comprised 47 grain growers in WA. They commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western Australia in connection with contracts between each of them and the defendant (Emerald) in relation to the placement of grain produced by the Growers into a pool of grain held by and sold by Emerald. The precise characterisation of the contracts, and whether they gave rise to a trust relationship, whereby Emerald held funds received from the sale of the grain on trust for each grower, was one of the main matters in dispute.

    Read more

  • Is your notice of termination effective?

    Notice of dismissal must specify date when employment will end
    An employee has been allowed to proceed with their unfair dismissal claim because an employer did not specify their end date in the letter of termination. In the recent case of Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board v Garth Duggan [2017] FWCFB 4878 (Metropolitan Fire) the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission (Commission) found that notice of dismissal must specify the date when the employment will end, or at least provide an 'ascertainable date' in order to comply with the Fair Work Act 2009.

    Read more

  • Avoiding the ambush: Does your construction contract include a proper dispute resolution clause?

    Importance of ensuring all 'construction contracts' have a proper dispute resolution clause

    A recent decision by the Supreme Court of Victoria has highlighted the importance of ensuring that all ‘construction contracts’ have a proper dispute resolution clause to protect against claims under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) (SOP Act). In a recent dispute between a government Department and a contractor,[1] the Supreme Court of Victoria found that the dispute resolution procedure in the then current Victorian Government Core Conditions (which allow a contractor to resolve disputes by way of referral to arbitration) constitutes a ‘method of resolving disputes’ under the legislation.[2]

    Read more

  • Timing issues with payment of deposits by electronic transfer


    Allow sufficient time for processing of electronic transfers by third parties into receiving account
    While electronic transfer is considered a faster and more direct method of payment than the traditional cheque, the recent case of Long v Hijazi1 suggests that parties to a property transaction may need to allow more time for payment of deposits where the contract provides for electronic transfer of funds.

    Read more

  • Restraints of trade and repudiation: Why employers need to be careful when directing departing employees to go on gardening leave


    Court can find implied right to direct employee to go on gardening leave
    Restraints of trade: When will directions by employers to departing employees constitute repudiation? A recent NSW Supreme Court decision has upheld the validity of an employer’s direction to place a departing employee on gardening leave as well as enforcing a six month post-employment non-compete restraints of trade. The judgment confirms that if an employer is careful not to repudiate the employment agreement, it can direct a senior employee to go on gardening leave and return company property at the time of the direction.

    Read more

  • Avoiding bankruptcy by attacking the ‘judgment debt’

    Judgment debtor successfully challenges creditor's petition in spite of contested trial
    The High Court’s recent decision in Ramsay Health Care Australia Pty Ltd v Compton [2017] HCA 28 has confirmed a bankruptcy court can exercise a discretion to go behind the judgment debt where sufficient reason is shown for questioning whether there is a debt due to the petitioning creditor. In Ramsay, the judgment debtor, Mr Crompton, was successful in challenging a creditor’s petition even though there had been a contested trial. The basis relied upon by Mr Crompton for challenging the ‘debt’ was not raised by Mr Crompton at the trial even though he could have done so.

    Read more

  • Suspension should not be a ‘knee-jerk’ reaction according to the recent High Court case of Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth


    Employers should not simply suspend employee as precautionary act for investigation
    When should you suspend employees? Employers should not suspend employees as a matter of course. Suspension of employees should only be carried out when it is necessary and reasonable in the circumstances. According to ACAS’ guide on Discipline and grievances at work, suspension may be necessary and reasonable where “relationships have broken down, in gross misconduct cases or where there are risks to an employee’s or the company’s property or responsibilities to other parties. Exceptionally you may wish to consider suspension with pay where you have reasonable grounds for concern that evidence has been tampered with, destroyed or witnesses pressurised before the meeting.”

    Read more

  • Is your trade mark vulnerable to attack? Court delivers clarity in imaging fight

    Intellectual property

    Assignment can no longer cure defect in ownership
    Trade mark owners who have been assigned a trade mark to rectify a defect in proprietorship should consider filing a new application. Earlier this year, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia ruled that an error on the Trade Marks Register (with respect to the proprietorship of a trade mark) cannot be subsequently rectified by assignment to the correct proprietor. Consequently, any registration resulting from such a purported assignment is invalid.

    Read more




  • Latest Updated (06 October 2017)
  • ACT 360
    Insolvency Act 1967 (Revised 1988)
  • Latest Revoked (13 October 2017)
  • PU(A) 199/1969
    Bankruptcy Rules 1969

Events Calendar
Bankruptcy & Winding Up: Impact Of The New Legislative Regime
15 November 2017 | Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur
Auction, e-Lelong & Foreclosure: Understanding The New Fundamentals
21 November 2017 | Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur
Events Gallery

Secured By Global Sign