SAMSURI BAHARUDDIN & ORS v. MOHAMED AZAHARI MATIASIN & ANOTHER APPEAL  3 CLJ 287
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
MD RAUS SHARIF PCA, AHMAD MAAROP FCJ, HASAN LAH FCJ,
ABU SAMAH NORDIN FCJ, AZIAH ALI JCA
[CIVIL APPEALS NO: 02(f)-34-04-2014(S) & 02(f)-35-04-2014(S)]
19 JANUARY 2017
LEGAL PROFESSION: Admission - Ad hoc - Arbitration in Sabah - Foreign lawyer appointed as counsel in arbitration proceedings - Whether foreign lawyers who are not advocates within meaning of Advocates Ordinance 1953 (`Ordinance') prohibited from representing parties in arbitration proceedings in Sabah - Whether Ordinance applicable to arbitration proceedings in Sabah - Whether advocates admitted in Sabah have exclusive right to represent parties in arbitration proceedings in Sabah - Whether s. 8(1) read together with s. 2(1)(a) and (b) of Ordinance confer to Sabah advocates exclusivity of right to practise by representing and appearing for any party in arbitration proceedings in Sabah
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Definition - `To practise in Sabah' - Advocates Ordinance 1953, ss. 2(1)(a)(b) & 8(1) - Whether s. 8(1) must be read together with s. 2(1)(a) and (b) - Whether confer to Sabah advocates exclusivity of right to practise by representing and appearing for any party in arbitration proceedings in Sabah
LOI TECK CHAI & YANG LAIN lwn. KINTA MEDICAL CENTRE SDN BHD  3 CLJ 486
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, IPOH
SAMSUDIN HASSAN H
[GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22NCVC-94-2011]
9 DISEMBER 2016
TORT: Kecuaian - Tanggungjawab berjaga-jaga - Kemungkiran - Pesakit menerima rawatan hospital - Pesakit sah positif HIV selepas menerima darah yang dibekalkan oleh klinik ke hospital - Sama ada wujud tanggungjawab berjaga-jaga oleh klinik terhadap pesakit - Sama ada tanggungjawab berjaga-jaga dimungkiri - Sama ada pesakit mengalami kerosakan dan kerugian akibat kemungkiran tanggungjawab berjaga-jaga klinik - Sama ada kecuaian klinik terbukti
TORT: Ganti rugi - Kecuaian - Pesakit menerima rawatan hospital - Pesakit sah positif HIV selepas menerima darah yang dibekalkan oleh klinik ke hospital - Tuntutan ganti rugi am dan khas - Faktor-faktor yang dipertimbangkan dalam mengawardkan ganti rugi - Sama ada tuntutan ganti rugi disokong - Jumlah ganti rugi yang wajar diawardkan
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.
A tale of two crocodiles
Crocodile International wins Supreme Court fight against rival Lacoste
Last week was an exciting week in the trade mark world, as the Supreme Court released its latest decision in a long standing dispute between Crocodile International and Lacoste. Supreme Court decisions on trade mark law are very rare, and this decision was especially welcomed as a clarification on the law on non-use of trade marks in New Zealand. Crocodile trade mark The case related to the question of whether Lacoste had used its trade mark registration (the crocodile mark). Lacoste owned this mark as a result of an assignment to it from a Crocodile company many years ago. Lacoste had never used the trade mark in this form, and had never used any trade mark including the word crocodile.
First case on Market Manipulation decided in New Zealand
Matters to which court will have regard in determining whether manipulation has occurredThe High Court (Court) decision in Financial Markets Authority v Warminger is being read with interest by capital market participants as the first case on market manipulation decided in New Zealand. The Court found that Mr Warminger acted in a way that gave or was likely to give a false appearance of trading in 2 of 10 claims made by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA). Market manipulation through trading (as opposed to where false or misleading information is disseminated about a security so that a trader can take advantage of an artificially high or low price) can take many forms, including trading where there is no change in beneficial ownership, placing contemporaneous buy and sell orders to create a misleading appearance of trading (matched orders or wash sales), marking the close by trading at close of the market to affect the price, or repeatedly buying at a higher price to induce others to bid more (upticking).
A landmark judgement
Capital suggestion Judgement, “not passion should prevail”. Justice Athar Minallah of the Islamabad High Court has delivered a landmark judgement – BNP Pvt Ltd., v Capital Development Authority. The case involves One Constitution Avenue – an upscale, high-rise, twin-tower real-estate development – in which the entire who’s who, the elitist-of-the-elite of Islamabad own at least one apartment. In the 12,832-word judgement the word ‘authority’ appears 147 times, the word ‘regulation’ appears 55 times and the word ‘regulatory’ appears 15 times.
Federal Court sheds light on the distinction between ‘recall to duty’ and ‘overtime’
AUSTRALIAEmploymentWhen recall to duty becomes ‘overtime’The Federal Court has provided guidance about when recall to duty becomes ‘overtime’. This is increasingly becoming an issue for employers due to flexibility in working arrangements and employees working outside of ‘normal’ hours and workplaces. In Polan v Goulburn Valley Health (No 2)  FCA 30, the Federal Court was required to determine the quantum of an employee’s underpayment of wages claim. The claim was based on the performance of on-call duties outside her ordinary hours of work between 2006 and 2012.
FWC finds redundancies not genuine; reinstates four workers
AUSTRALIAEmploymentEmployees reinstated as dismissals found to be harsh, unreasonable and unjustThe Fair Work Commission has confirmed its approach to deciding whether a dismissal is a genuine redundancy within the meaning of section 389 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA). In Paul Williams and Ors v Staples Pty Ltd  FWC 607, four employees were reinstated when the Fair Work Commission found their dismissals were not genuine redundancies under section 389. The dismissals were found to be harsh, unreasonable and unjust.
CASE(S) OF THE WEEK