Back to Top

CLJ Bulletin, Issue 2016, Vol 33
18 August 2016


Print this page

Introduction:

To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription

Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe


New This Week

1. Case(s) of the Week

  1. ONG TEIK THAI v. PP [2016] 7 CLJ 1

2. Latest Cases

  1. Legal Network Series

  2. CLJ 2016 VOL 7 PART 1

3. Articles

  1. LNS Article(s)

  2. CLJ Article(s)

4. Legislation Highlights

  1. Principal Acts

  2. Amending Acts

  3. PU(A)

  4. PU(B)

  5. Legislation Alert

Search Guide No. 9
None of the words "x" exclude specific search words or phrases from the search

Finds cases not containing the word/phrase.

Key in the Search Term column the word NOT followed by an opening bracket. Then key in the word to exclude followed by the closing bracket. For multiple words separate each word with a space. The same AND searching rules will apply. The same rule will also apply for excluding an exact phrase. Add quotation marks "x" before and after the phrase.

Example:-

1. not (drugs dadah) 

- get results without the words "drugs and dadah"



CASE(S) OF THE WEEK

ONG TEIK THAI v. PP [2016] 7 CLJ 1
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
ARIFIN ZAKARIA CJ, MD RAUS SHARIF PCA, ZULKEFLI AHMAD MAKINUDIN CJ (MALAYA), AHMAD MAAROP FCJ, HASAN LAH FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05-26-02-2012(P)]
4 JANUARY 2016

CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - Sections 302, 34 - Murder - Common intention - Ingredients - Proof - Contradictions in evidence of witnesses - Whether contradictions material and fatal - Whether no prima facie case made out - Whether appellant to be acquitted and discharged


LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2015] 1 LNS 385

ZAHARUDDIN ITHNIN lwn. PP

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan - Kesalahan menyalahgunakan harta - Sama ada kesemua elemen pertuduhan telah dibuktikan - Sama ada keputusan hakim bicara boleh diketepikan semata-mata kerana memberi pertimbangan kepada pernyataan s. 112 secara substantif

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Kesalahan menyalahgunakan harta - Hukuman penjara 3 tahun bagi setiap kesalahan dan berjalan secara serentak - Sama ada hukuman yang telah dijatuhkan memadai dan bersesuaian

KETERANGAN: Ekshibit - Kebolehterimaan - Rakaman CCTV - Sama ada rakaman CCTV telah menepati pra-syarat s. 90A Akta Keterangan 1950 untuk diterima sebagai keterangan untuk menyokong kes pendakwaan - Sama ada rakaman CCTV dan kamera-kamera berada dalam perjalanan yang biasa

KETERANGAN: Saksi - Saksi belot - Soal balas - Sama ada seseorang saksi yang dianggap sebagai saksi belot boleh disoal balas oleh pihak yang memanggilnya - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 154

KETERANGAN: Kenyataan - Kenyataan di bawah s. 112 Kanun Prosedur Jenayah - Kebolehterimaan kenyataan s. 112 - Penerimaan kenyataan s. 112 sebagai keterangan substantif - Sama ada kenyataan s. 112 boleh diterima sebagai keterangan yang substantif

[2015] 1 LNS 386

ANANDA RAJ RAJENDRAN & YANG LAIN lwn. PP & SATU KES LAGI

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Kesalahan rompakan bersenjata secara berkumpulan - Sama ada kesemua elemen pertuduhan telah dibuktikan oleh pendakwaan - Sama ada hakim bicara wajar menolak pembelaan alibi setelah mendapati tertuduh gagal mengemukakan sebarang notis alibi

KETERANGAN: Kawad cam - Perjalanan kawad cam - Perlakuan saksi ketika kawad cam - Saksi mengecam tertuduh berdasarkan saiz badan dan muka - Tertuduh memakai topi keledar dengan visor ketika melakukan rompakan - Sama ada pengecaman saksi berdasarkan saiz badan dan muka tanpa memberi gambaran ciri-ciri terperinci bentuk badan tertuduh boleh diterima

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pendakwaan - Kes pendakwaan - Budi bicara dalam memanggil saksi - Jurang dalam kes pendakwaan - Sama ada kegagalan memanggil saksi dan kegagalan menawar saksi kepada pihak pembelaan boleh mewujudkan sebarang jurang dalam kes pihak pendakwaan - Sama ada pendakwaan mempunyai budi bicara untuk memanggil saksi bagi membuktikan kes pihak pendakwaan

[2016] 1 LNS 151

PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BERHAD v. MOHAMMAD RAZALI SAMSUDIN & ANOR

INSURANCE: Motor insurance - Claims - Road accident - Claim by innocent third party - Liability ascertained 50% on insured and remaining 50% contributory liability on other rider who had died - Court allowed 100% of third party's claim against insured - Insured paid 50% only and refused to pay balance of other half - Whether plaintiff entitled to damages on a 100% basis - Whether plaintiff as innocent third party has prerogative to take action against any of tortfeasor - Whether plaintiff entitled to recover entire damages allowed

INSURANCE: Motor insurance - Liability - Liability of insurer when insured was found 50% liable for causing road accident - Liability ascertained 50% on insured and remaining 50% contributory liability on other rider who died - Court allowed 100% of third party's claim against insured - Whether insurer was only liable to pay judgment sum based on proportion of liability as found by court

[2016] 1 LNS 158

COLD CHAIN NETWORK (M) SDN BHD v. SIME DARBY FOODS AND BEVERAGES MARKETING SDN BHD

CONTRACT: Damages - Agency - Claim for loss of unreturned pallets - Defendant contracted with plaintiff for total storage and logistic services - Costs of services measured in terms of pallets - Plaintiff alleged that defendant failed to inform when its customers' pallets were ready for collection and they were prevented from collecting pallets - Whether plaintiff was able to provide documentary evidence to substantiate its claim - Whether plaintiff had a legal right to claim from defendant for value of pallets - Whether it was plaintiff's duty and responsibility to collect pallets that they had used for their deliveries

CONTRACT: Damages - Loss of profit - Claim for profit for failure to provide business volume as warranted and warehouse operations charges - Plaintiff proceeded with warehouse expansion plans at full speed in absence of any formal agreement between parties - Whether parties reached any agreement on terms which would bind them - Whether plaintiff should bear costs of their haste - Whether plaintiff had right to claim damages for loss suffered due to insufficient business volume

[2016] 1 LNS 160

IDI NABEL KHAIRUDDIN v. PT LION GROUP & ANOR

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Action - Employee's claim for damages against employer for wrongful termination of contract - Employee elected to seek relief under s. 20 of Industrial Relation Act 1967 ('IRA') - Minister refused to make reference to Industrial Court - Recourse to a writ action following Minister's refusal to make reference to Industrial Court - Whether claim sustainable - Whether proper avenue was to commence judicial review proceedings - Whether an employee can be permitted to institute a civil action against employer for damages after having elected to seek relief under s. 20 of IRA - Whether claim was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process of court


CLJ 2016 VOL 7 PART 1

 

FEDERAL COURT

Ong Teik Thai v. PP
Arifin Zakaria CJ, Md Raus Sharif PCA, Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin CJ (Malaya), Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah FCJJ
(Criminal Law - Murder - Contradictions in evidence of witnesses - Whether material and fatal) [2016] 7 CLJ 1 [FC]

COURT OF APPEAL

Alami Vegetable Oil Products Sdn Bhd v. Hafeez Iqbal Oil & Ghee Industries (Pvt) Ltd
Abdul Wahab Patail, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid JJCA
(Arbitration; Statutory Interpretation - Award - Application for recognition and enforcement of awards as judgments) [2016] 7 CLJ 19 [CA]

PP v. Prakas Rao Krishnan
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Kamardin Hashim JJCA
(Criminal Procedure - Appeal against acquittal and discharge - Whether defence probable) [2016] 7 CLJ 29 [CA]

Wong Chee Kheong v. PP & Other Appeals
Md Raus Sharif PCA, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Idrus Harun JJCA
(Securities; Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Shares - Trading account - Offences under s. 84(3) read with s. 88B of Security Industry Act 1983 - Elements of offences - Whether established - Whether sentence adequate) [2016] 7 CLJ 39 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Ansari Abdullah v. Shalmon Sanangan
Ravinthran Paramaguru J
(Tort - Defamation - Libel - Whether proven - Defences - Fair comment and justification - Whether damage presumed once libel proven) [2016] 7 CLJ 73 [HC]

Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri v. Megayear Strategy Sdn Bhd
Hashim Hamzah J
(Revenue Law - Income tax - Refund of tax paid - Entitlement to) [2016] 7 CLJ 92 [HC]

Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Euro Prestasi & Partners (M) Sdn Bhd
Asmabi Mohamad J
(Legal Profession - Practice of law - Debt recovery agency - Whether 'authorised person' within s. 36 Legal Profession Act 1976) [2016] 7 CLJ 102 [HC]

Pa'Wan Teh Mohd Hussin v. SU Citra Bina Sdn Bhd
Abdul Wahab Mohamed JC
(Company Law - Winding up - Stay of order - Application by contributory - Discretion of court) [2016] 7 CLJ 112 [HC]

Raub Australian Gold Mining Sdn Bhd v. Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd & Ors
Rosnaini Saub J
(Tort - Defamation - Defences - Responsible journalism and reportage - Whether defendants satisfied test of responsible journalism) [2016] 7 CLJ 124 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

ARBITRATION

Award - Enforcement - Application for recognition and enforcement of awards as judgments - Opposition to application - Issues relating to merit of award - Whether could be raised under s. 38 of Arbitration Act 2005 ('AA') - Whether should have been brought under s. 39 AA - Whether s. 38 only permitted domestic and foreign award to be recognised and enforced - Whether appellant failed to appreciate s. 3 AA which recognises domestic international arbitration - Whether appeal meritorious
Alami Vegetable Oil Products Sdn Bhd v. Hafeez Iqbal Oil & Ghee Industries (Pvt) Ltd
(Abdul Wahab Patail, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 19 [CA]

COMPANY LAW

Winding up - Stay of order - Permanent stay of winding up order - Application pursuant to Companies Act 1965, s. 243(1) - Application by contributory - Power to stay winding up order - Discretion of court - Whether circumstances warranted court to exercise its discretion to stay winding up order
Pa'Wan Teh Mohd Hussin v. SU Citra Bina Sdn Bhd
(Abdul Wahab Mohamed JC) [2016] 7 CLJ 112 [HC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Penal Code - Section 34 - Offences under s. 84(3) read with s. 88B of Security Industry Act 1983 - Elements of offences - Whether established - Whether there was change in beneficial ownership of shares transacted - Whether common intention to commit offence established - Whether knowledge proven - Whether common intention under s. 34 of Penal Code applicable to offences outside Penal Code
Wong Chee Kheong v. PP & Other Appeals
(Md Raus Sharif PCA, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Idrus Harun JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 39 [CA]

Penal Code - Sections 302, 34 - Murder - Common intention - Ingredients - Proof - Contradictions in evidence of witnesses - Whether contradictions material and fatal - Whether no prima facie case made out - Whether appellant to be acquitted and discharged
Ong Teik Thai v. PP
(Arifin Zakaria CJ, Md Raus Sharif PCA, Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin CJ (Malaya), Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah FCJJ) [2016] 7 CLJ 1 [FC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against acquittal and discharge - Appeal by prosecution - Drugs found in car driven by accused - Accused acquitted of two offences of trafficking but convicted for offence of possession - Whether accused had knowledge of drugs found in car - Allegation that accused drove car at behest of another person - Whether defence probable - Whether trial judge erred in acquitting and discharging accused when prima facie case was earlier found to infer accused had knowledge of drugs - Whether trial judge ought to have invoked presumption under s. 37(d) of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
PP v. Prakas Rao Krishnan
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Kamardin Hashim JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 29 [CA]

Sentence - Appeal against sentence - Offences under s. 84(3) read with s. 88B of Security Industry Act 1983 - Reduction of sentence by High Court Judge - Sentence of three months by Sessions Court Judge reduced to one day - Whether commensurate with offence and role played by offender - Whether reflected gravity of offence - Whether sentence manifestly inadequate
Wong Chee Kheong v. PP & Other Appeals
(Md Raus Sharif PCA, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Idrus Harun JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 39 [CA]

LEGAL PROFESSION

Practice of law - Unauthorised person - Debt recovery agency provided legal services normally performed by advocate and solicitor of High Court of Malaya - Allegation against - Whether 'authorised person' within meaning of s. 36 Legal Profession Act 1976 ('LPA') - Whether defendant's activities illegal and detrimental to public - Whether breached provisions under LPA - Whether injunction granted to restrain defendant from continuing with its activities
Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Euro Prestasi & Partners (M) Sdn Bhd
(Asmabi Mohamad J) [2016] 7 CLJ 102 [HC]

REVENUE LAW

Income tax - Refund of tax paid - Entitlement to - Appeal against decision of Special Commissioner of Income Tax ('SCIT') - Whether dividends were payable by way of cash or credit - Position prior to amendment of s. 108(1) of Income Tax Act 1987 - Whether SCIT directed minds to issues raised - Whether findings of facts by SCIT ought to be disturbed
Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri v. Megayear Strategy Sdn Bhd
(Hashim Hamzah J) [2016] 7 CLJ 92 [HC]

SECURITIES

Shares - Trading account - Offences under s. 84(3) read with s. 88B of Security Industry Act 1983 - Whether transactions executed in accounts were genuine demand to invest shares - Whether there was change in beneficial ownership of shares transacted - Whether common intention established - Whether knowledge proven
Wong Chee Kheong v. PP & Other Appeals
(Md Raus Sharif PCA, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Idrus Harun JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 39 [CA]

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

Construction of statutes - Purposive approach - Whether judicial decision not to be confined to law - Whether common sense approach to be recognised
Alami Vegetable Oil Products Sdn Bhd v. Hafeez Iqbal Oil & Ghee Industries (Pvt) Ltd
(Abdul Wahab Patail, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid JJCA) [2016] 7 CLJ 19 [CA]

TORT

Defamation - Damages - Whether damage presumed once libel proven - Whether plaintiff required to prove resulting damage - Factors considered in assessment of damages - Whether allegations damaged professional standing of plaintiff
Ansari Abdullah v. Shalmon Sanangan
(Ravinthran Paramaguru J) [2016] 7 CLJ 73 [HC]

Defamation - Libel - Defamation on social networking service - Whether proven - Whether insinuated that plaintiff was corrupt and betrayed his political party for monetary gain - Whether defamatory of plaintiff
Ansari Abdullah v. Shalmon Sanangan
(Ravinthran Paramaguru J) [2016] 7 CLJ 73 [HC]

Defamation - Libel - Defences - Fair comment and justification - Publication of statutory declaration - Belief that content of statutory declaration was true - Whether sufficient justification - Whether incumbent to prove allegation - Whether repeating libellous allegation made by someone else constitutes defamation - Whether comment had factual basis - Whether defences available
Ansari Abdullah v. Shalmon Sanangan
(Ravinthran Paramaguru J) [2016] 7 CLJ 73 [HC]

Defamation - Defences - Responsible journalism and reportage - Publication of articles and videos relating to gold mining operation - Whether mining operation affected safety and health of residents - Whether a matter of public interest - Whether defendants satisfied test of responsible journalism - Whether defence of reportage available - Whether there was evidence of malice and malicious falsehood
Raub Australian Gold Mining Sdn Bhd v. Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Rosnaini Saub J) [2016] 7 CLJ 124 [HC]


ARTICLES

LNS Article(s)

  1. FACILITATIVE VS EVALUATIVE MEDIATION - IS THERE NECESSARILY A DICHOTOMY?* [Read excerpt]
    by: DORCAS QUEK** [2016] 1 LNS(A) lxx

  2. [2016] 1 LNS(A) lxx
    logo
    SINGAPORE

    FACILITATIVE VS EVALUATIVE MEDIATION - IS THERE NECESSARILY A DICHOTOMY?*
    by
    DORCAS QUEK**

    Introduction

    The origin of the facilitative-evaluative distinction in mediation can be traced to “Riskin’s grid”, a diagram published by Leonard Riskin in 1996 to depict different mediation orientations. The Riskin Grid has generated much discussion amongst mediators as to whether the evaluative style of mediation is appropriate and whether it can even be considered mediation. In many jurisdictions apart from the US, where this grid originated, facilitative and evaluative mediation now represent diametrically opposing styles of mediation. Some mediators have classified themselves under either end of the dichotomy, while other mediators claim to switch between both styles depending on the circumstances. This paper examines the meaning commonly attributed to both these styles of mediation, and suggests that the continual dichotomy between the styles has distracted mediators from examining more fundamental questions concerning mediation and other modes of Alternative Dispute Resolution.

    The Riskin Grid

    Any understanding of the facilitative-evaluative divide will not be complete without an examination of Riskin’s grid, and Riskin’s intentions in creating such a continuum of mediation orientations.[1]

    . . .

    * This article was originally published in the (January 2013) issue of the Singapore Law Gazette (www.lawgazette.com.sg), the official publication of the Law Society of Singapore, published by LexisNexis. Reproduced with permission.

    ** District Judge, Primary Dispute Resolution Centre, Subordinate Courts of Singapore.


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

CLJ Article(s)

  1. THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE IN ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN MALAYSIA: THREE-PARENT IVF AND GENE THERAPY ON THE HORIZON [Read excerpt]
    by: DR HANIWARDA YAAKOB* [2016] 7 CLJ(A) i CLJ 2016 Volume 7 (Part 1)

  2. [2016] 7 CLJ(A) i
    logo
    MALAYSIA

    THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE IN ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN MALAYSIA:
    THREE-PARENT IVF AND GENE THERAPY ON THE HORIZON

    by
    DR HANIWARDA YAAKOB*

    Abstract

    Assisted reproductive technology (ART) is rapidly advancing worldwide. Various technologies have emerged ranging from in vitro fertilisation (IVF), preimplantation genetic diagnosis, three-parent IVF, gene therapy and many more. The advancement in ART does not leave Malaysia behind where this area is vastly growing in this country. While the advancement in reproductive technologies is applauded for the benefits they bring to society, their arrival is not free from legal, ethical and religious dilemmas. Individuals and society must, therefore, be protected from any untoward consequences arising from the use of these modern reproductive technologies. As the role of law is to protect society, a suitable legal mechanism must be put in place to regulate these technologies. In determining the appropriate legal framework that can be adopted in Malaysia, reference may be made to the notion of individual reproductive autonomy propounded by western scholars with appropriate modifications for application in Malaysia as a multi-racial society with Islam declared as the religion of the country under the Federal Constitution. This paper thus briefly identifies and explores the legal, ethical and moral concerns brought about by emerging reproductive technologies namely, three-parent IVF and gene therapy and argues for the adoption of the notion of individual reproductive autonomy subject to the limitations proposed herein.

    Keywords: Bioethics; Three-Parent IVF; Gene Therapy

    . . .

    * Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, e-mail: hani75@ukm.edu.my


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealing
ACT 776 National Security Council Act 2016 1 August 2016 [PU(B) 310/2016] -
ACT 775 Traditional and Complementary Medicine Act 2016 1 August 2016 [PU(B) 325/2016] - sections 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 , 16, 17, 20, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 60 and 61 and subsections 63(1) and (3) -
ACT 774 Allied Health Professions Act 2016 Not Yet In Force -
ACT 773 Finance Act 2015 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 33; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s 39; The Labuan Business Activity Tax Act 1990 [Act 445] see s 44; The Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 [Act 762] see s 47; The Promotion of Investments Act 1986 [Act 327] see s 57 -
ACT 772 Animal Welfare Act 2015 Not Yet In Force -

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1514 National Anti-Drugs Agency (Amendment) Act 2016 18 August 2016 ACT 638
ACT A1513 Civil Defence (Amendment) Act 2016 Not yet in force ACT 221
ACT A1512 Road Transport (Amendment) Act 2016 Not yet in force ACT 333
ACT A1511 Child (Amendment) Act 2016 Not Yet In Force ACT 611
ACT A1510 Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) (Amendment) Act 2016 15 July 2016 ACT 316

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(A) 222/2016 Farmers' Organization (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2016 12 August 2016 29 January 2016 PU(A) 303/1983
PU(A) 221/2016 Capital Markets and Services (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2016 12 August 2016 15 August 2016 PU(A) 483/2012
PU(A) 220/2016 Poisons (Amendment of Poisons List) Order 2016 3 August 2016 4 August 2016 ACT 366
PU(A) 219/2016 Customs (Prohibition of Imports) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2016 1 August 2016 1 September 2016 PU(A) 490/2012
PU(A) 218/2016 Customs (Prohibition of Exports) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2016 1 August 2016 1 September 2016 PU(A) 491/2012

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(B) 361/2016 Notification of Values of Crude Petroleum Oil Under Section 12 17 August 2016 18 August 2016 to 31 August 2016 ACT 235
PU(B) 360/2016 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 504 Bandar Kuala Lumpur 15 August 2016 16 August 2016 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 359/2016 Revocation of Reservation of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 19 Seksyen 5 Pekan Batu 15 August 2016 16 August 2016 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 358/2016 Notice To Third Parties 12 August 2016 13 August 2016 ACT 613
PU(B) 357/2016 Notice To Third Parties 12 August 2016 13 August 2016 ACT 613

Legislation Alert

Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended
PU(A) 490/2012 Customs (Prohibition of Imports) Order 2012 PU(A) 219/2016 1 September 2016 Second Schedule, Third Schedule and Fourth Schedule
PU(A) 491/2012 Customs (Prohibition of Exports) Order 2012 PU(A) 218/2016 1 September 2016 Second Schedule
ACT 366 Poisons Act 1952 (Revised 1989) PU(A) 220/2016 4 August 2016 First Schedule
PU(A) 347/2014 Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Mechanism to Determine Unreasonably High Profit) (Net Profit Margin) Regulations 2014 PU(A) 180/2016 25 June 2016 Regulations 2 and Schedule
ACT 316 Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ACT A1510 15 July 2016 Section 1, 4, 5, 5A and 6

 

Revoked

 

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from
PU(A) 379/2012 Pensions Adjustment (Lowest Pension) Order 2012 PU(A) 188/2016 1 July 2016
PU(A) 136/2015 Highway Authority Malaysia (Incorporation) (Collection of Tolls) (East Coast Express Way-Phase 2) Order 2015 PU(A) 193/2016 15 July 2016
PU(B) 168/2013 Polling Districts, Polling Centres and Polling Hours (Amendment) (No. 15) PU(B) 197/2016 30 April 2016
PU(B) 167/2013 Polling Districts, Polling Centres and Polling Hours (Amendment) (No. 14) PU(B) 197/2016 30 April 2016
PU(B) 164/2013 Polling Districts, Polling Centres and Polling Hours (Amendment) (No. 11) PU(B) 197/2016 30 April 2016