KOH KIEN HOOI & ORS v. KEPONG INDUSTRIAL PARK SDN BHD
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
MOHD ARIEF EMRAN ARIFIN JC
[CIVIL ACTION NO: WA-22NCvC-350-05-2021]
23 MAY 2022
Even though the High Court has the jurisdiction to hear claims falling within the jurisdiction of the subordinate courts, the practice of bypassing the lower courts should be frowned upon and should be discouraged. Unless there are cogent reasons as to why a claim should be instituted in the High Court, litigants should file their claims following the jurisdiction provided for in the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 and the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
NG MIN LIN v. 2HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
JOHN LEE KIEN HOW JC
[CIVIL SUIT NO: WA-22NCVC-700-10-2018]
24 MARCH 2022
The word 'may' under s. 78(2) of the Strata Management Act 2013 ('SMA') gives a management corporation the option to either commence an action against a defaulted proprietor or to resort to the mechanism stated in s. 79 of the SMA or any other mechanisms; Section 78(2) provides the management corporations discretion. The filing of a summons in court is not a mandatory mechanism. Hence, the act of executing the mechanism stated in para. 6 of the Third Schedule of the Strata Management (Maintenance and Management) Regulations 2015 by the management corporation, is not wrong or irregular.
CAS v. MPPL & ANOR
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
FAIZAH JAMALUDIN J
[WRIT NO: WA-22F-1-05-2019 (ORIGINALLY ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: WA-24F-107-07-2015)]
21 JUNE 2022
 CLJ JT (7)
Case laws are replete with decisions that the courts are not seized with the power, in civil proceedings, to compel adults to produce deoxyribonucleic acid ('DNA') samples to prove the paternity of a child. However, it has never been discussed nor decided whether the courts could order for a child to undergo a DNA test to determine the child's paternity. In this distinctive judgment, a prima facie case was established as there was an avalanche of evidence that there existed sexual relations during the conception period of the child, between parties engaging in an extra-marital affair. Also present were overwhelming documentary evidence of an intimate relationship akin to that of a family unit. As it was in the best interest of the child to know her biological father, the child was accordingly ordered to undergo a DNA test to conclusively resolve the ambiguity as to her paternity.
HA SIAW SHYONG v. MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HOUSING SARAWAK & ANOR
HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK, SIBU
CHRISTOPHER CHIN SOO YIN JC
[JUDICIAL REVIEW NO: SBW-25-1-1-2022 (HC)]
04 MARCH 2022
Judicial review is a tool for the judicial arm to provide a check and balance on Executive decisions and discretion. However, the circumstances in which a law is enacted and when a discretion is exercised by the Executive are relevant and important considerations in deciding whether the Executive had crossed the line. The Covid-19 pandemic was a case in point. One has to consider the harm to the greater public had such an allegedly impugned decision not been made.
- Ykl Engineering Sdn Bhd v. Sungei Kahang Palm Oil Sdn Bhd & Anor  1 LNS 1531 [FC]
- Vigny Alfred Raj Vicetor Amratha Raja v. PP  1 LNS 1530 [FC]
- Persatuan Pemandu-Pemandu Perempuan Malaysia lwn. Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan  1 LNS 1383 [CA]
- Hemraj & Co Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd & Ors  7 CLJ 169 [CA]
- The United States Of America v. Menteri Sumber Manusia & Ors  6 CLJ 493 [FC]
- Inai Kiara Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Macon Charter B.V  1 LNS 1126 [CA]
- Guangzhou Light Industry & Trade Group Ltd & Ors v. Lintas Superstore Sdn Bhd  6 CLJ 653 [FC]
“Section 2 of the Evidence Act does not expressly state that the Act does not apply to proceedings before the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT). However, the SCIT, similar to an arbitral tribunal, is an inferior tribunal; it is not a court. Hence, it follows that the Evidence Act also does not apply to proceedings before the SCIT. As the Evidence Act does not apply to proceedings before the SCIT, it follows that provisions relating to the examination of witnesses, including cross-examination, in the Evidence Act as well as case law on examination of witnesses do not apply to hearings before the SCIT.” - per Faizah Jamaludin J in Idaman Pelita Sdn Bhd v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri  4 CLJ 744
“Seksyen 48 Akta Pengangkutan Jalan 1987 ini harus ditafsirkan secara golden rule dengan mengambil kira kepentingan awam dan juga judicial notice. Perlu diambil maklum bahawa jumlah kenderaan bermotor di Kota Bharu khasnya dan Kelantan amnya adalah amat tinggi. Dengan pertambahan jumlah kenderaan ini, maka permintaan untuk tempat parkir yang terhad dalam kawasan bandar adalah amat tinggi dan menyulitkan. Motokar pemohon yang masih di tempat parkir dengan keadaan caj parkir telah habis akan mendatangkan kesusahan yang tidak berpatutan kepada pengguna-pengguna lain. Saya berpendapat keadaan ini adalah termasuk dalam tafsiran peruntukan s. 48 APJ 1987.
Atas penelitian dan penemuan-penemuan tersebut saya mendapati tindakan responden (mengunci tayar kereta pemohon) tidak menimbulkan unsur-unsur irrationality, illegality and procedural impropriety. Dengan ini saya menolak relif-relif yang dipohon dalam semakan kehakiman ini.”- Per Roslan Abu Bakar H in Nursyafawati Kasim lwn. Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu Bandaraya Islam  6 CLJ 120
“The principles on which an appellate court is allowed to receive additional evidence were earlier enunciated in the case of R v. Parks  3 All ER 633 (“R v. Parks”), which was later approved by the House of Lords in the case of R v. Pendleton  1 WLR 72.
Based on the above-cited cases, the appellant must cumulatively satisfy all the four requirements propounded in R v. Parks and the prerequisite in s. 61 of the CJA that it is necessary for the justice of the case in order to be allowed to adduce the additional evidence. Further, only in the most exceptional circumstances will the court receive additional evidence, and the matter is left entirely to the discretion of the appellate court if necessary in the interest of justice.” – Per Ab Karim Ab Jalil, Has Zanah Mehat, Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera JJCA in Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abd Razak v. PP  4 CLJ 231
“Judicial review is not merely procedural but a substantive and immutable component of judicial power - one which is inherent and which defines the very core function of an independent Judiciary. It is exclusively a judicial power of the civil superior courts.
Reading s. 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 as it stands and upon analysing the basis for judicial review in this country, I find that s. 66A of the ARIE 2003 is unconstitutional and void, as it is a provision which the SSLA has no power to make. I accordingly find that the petitioner has overcome the threshold of the presumption of constitutionality.” – per Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat CJ in SIS Forum (Malaysia) v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor; Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (Intervener)  3 CLJ 339
“I think it needs no explanation that a writ of possession and a committal action are execution or enforcement proceedings to deal with non-adherences to any judgment or order of the court. A writ of possession is not by itself an order of the court. As such, a failure to adhere to a writ of possession cannot be a basis to initiate contempt proceedings within the contemplation of O. 45 of the RC 2012. The very writ of possession or execution is meant and designed to enforce any issues of compliance with any judgment or order of the court. It is manifest that there are two prescribed methods of enforcement under O. 45 r. 3, namely by way of writ of possession and where r. 5 applies, an order of committal. The entire scheme of O. 45, in particular rr. 3 and 5 concern the execution of a judgment or an order of the court.” – per Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J in Harta Bitara Development Sdn Bhd v. Khairuddin Hj Mustapa (President Pertubuhan Seni Silat Lincah Malaysia)  3 CLJ 106
( as of 19 July 2022)
(as of 02 August 2022)
- PU(A) 228/2022
Control of Supplies (Prohibition on Export) (Amendment) Regulations 2022
- PU(A) 320/2021
Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Determination of Maximum Price) (No. 6) Order 2021
- PU(A) 449/2021
Road Transport (Prohibition of Use of Road) (Federal Roads) (No. 15) Order 2021
- PU(A) 159/2012
Copyright (Licensing Body) Regulations 2012
- PU(A) 127/2017
Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation (Order of Priority For Payments of Different Categories of Islamic Deposits, Determination and Classification of Assets and Application of Disposal Proceeds of Assets in the Winding Up of Deposit-Taking Member) Regulations 2017
- PU(A) 257/2022
Customs (Prohibition Of Imports) (Amendment) (No. 4) Order 2022
- PU(A) 256/2022
Price Control And Anti-Profiteering (Determination Of Maximum Price) (No. 9) Order 2022
- PU(A) 255/2022
Customs Duties (Goods Of Asean Countries Origin) (Asean Harmonised Tariff Nomenclature And Asean Trade In Goods Agreement) (Amendment) Order 2022
- PU(A) 254/2022
Control Of Supplies (Prohibition On Export) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2022
- PU(A) 253/2022
Control Of Supplies (Prohibition On Export) (Amendment) (Revocation) Regulations 2022
- PU(B) 363/2022
Appointment Of Members Of The Law Revision Committee
- PU(B) 362/2022
Appointment Of Members Of The Law Revision Committee
- PU(B) 361/2022
Appointment Of Member Of The Commission
- PU(B) 360/2022
Notice Of Impending Termination Of The Imposition Of Anti-Dumping Duties On Imports Of Cold Rolled Stainless Steel In Coils, Sheets Or Any Other Form Originating Or Exported From The People'S Republic Of China, The Republic Of Korea, Chinese Taipei And The Kingdom Of Thailand
- PU(B) 359/2022
Appointment Of Date Of Coming Into Operation
- Bills 2022
- Government Of Kelantan Gazette - Syariah Criminal Code (Ii) (1993) 2015
- Legislation: An Overview
- Legislation: FAQs
- High Court to decide on validity of defamation charges against Rewcastle Brown on Aug 12 05/08/2022
- Court dismisses Indira Gandhi's bid to initiate contempt proceedings against IGP 05/08/2022
- MCMC: Be wary of SMS from 'GOV' 05/08/2022
- "I lied to protect Lim Guan Eng," businessman tells court 04/08/2022
- KK chef freed of cannabis trafficking charge 04/08/2022
- Student assaults teacher, threatens to kill her after she cuts his hair 04/08/2022
- Federal Court declares Penang's Article 14A on anti-party hopping is consistent with Constitution 03/08/2022
- Labuan MP fails in bid to transfer his case from Sessions Court to High Court 02/08/2022
- Man gets 16 months jail for using fake entry permit payment instruction letter as identification 02/08/2022
- Sultanah of Terengganu says didn't meddle in TIA, does not even know Jho Low 01/08/2022
by Nur Azlina Mohamad Zahari[i] Ramalinggam Rajamanickam[ii] Rohaida Nordin[iii]
Orang kurang upaya berhak kepada perkara-perkara asas yang diperlukan dalam kehidupan sama seperti seorang manusia yang berkeupayaan, seperti akses kepada pendidikan, pekerjaan, perubatan, maklumat dan persekitaran fizikal. Hak orang kurang upaya terhadap semua akses tersebut telah menjadi antara hal perkara yang kian mendapat perhatian dan diterjemahkan dalam bentuk instrumen antarabangsa yang melibatkan hak asasi manusia. Kemunculan Konvensyen Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu tentang Hak Orang Kurang Upaya (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) telah menjadi satu titik tolak yang paling penting dalam dunia orang kurang upaya kerana hingga sekarang, Konvensyen tersebut merupakan instrumen antarabangsa yang paling lengkap dan menggariskan hampir semua hak-hak yang dijamin bagi orang kurang upaya serta menjadi rujukan utama hampir semua negara di dunia bagi perkara-perkara yang berkaitan dengan ketidakupayaan dan kebolehaksesan orang kurang upaya. Sebelum wujudnya Konvensyen Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu tentang Hak Orang Kurang Upaya, terdapat instrumen-instrumen antarabangsa yang telah wujud dan menjadi pemangkin kepada perjuangan hak orang kurang upaya terhadap akses-akses yang dinikmati oleh orang berkeupayaan.
STANDARDS OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND WHAT THEY MEAN FOR THE ACCUSED*
by Alexander Joseph Woon**
The recent cases of Parti Liyani v. PP and PP v. Yeo Sow Nam have thrown the spotlight on what it means to be acquitted.
This article examines how "acquittal" can mean that charges were either "disproved" or merely "not proved", per the definitions in the Evidence Act.
It argues that judges may, in suitable cases, make a finding of "disproved" so as to properly vindicate the reputation of the accused. An acquittal without elaboration leaves open the possibility that the accused committed the offence but it simply could not be proven, which may unfairly continue to damage his reputation.
by John Wilson and Kieran Pender*
What is meant by 'employee' and 'contractor' has changed over the years as the nature of work has evolved. John Wilson and Kieran Pender discuss the complexities of this distinction in light of two recent High Court cases.
For almost two centuries, the binary distinction between employees and independent contractors has been a central feature of employment law in Australia (and its predecessor colonial states). This longevity masks evolution and complexity — in that time, what is meant by employee and contractor has changed as the nature of work in the modern world evolved. Distinguishing between the two forms of contractual engagement was never straightforward, as consistent litigation over decades made clear.
In February, the High Court of Australia provided clarity in two cases decided in parallel. In Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd and ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v. Jamsek, the High Court revised the approach for determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. These cases are the Court's most significant employment law judgments in some time; their implications will reverberate in sectors across the country for years to come.
by Cynthia Lee Mei Fei[i] Azrul Haziq Khirullah[ii] Aryn Rozali[iii] Fatihah Azhar[iv]
During the recent Budget 2021 speech at parliament on 6 November 2021, Datuk Seri Tengku Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz (Minister of Finance ('MOF'')) announced that given the ever-evolving business environment, the Government shall aim to focus on business continuity to accelerate investments, strengthen strategic sectors and improve access to financing. He further announced that to encourage standardised credit lending activities and consumer protection, the Consumer Credit Act ('CCA') will be formulated with the assistance of Bank Negara Malaysia ('BNM') and the Securities Commission ('SC') to be a regulatory framework for activities related to the issuance of consumer credit such as the "Buy Now Pay Later" Scheme which is currently unregulated. The CCA is also intended to strengthen the supervision of non-bank and non-supervised credit providers. This was lauded as one of the most important announcements from Budget 2021.
by Kevin De Rozario*
In Malaysia, a writ of habeas corpus ('writ') is a fundamental right bestowed upon citizens and non-citizens against overzealous detaining authorities. The executive arm of government had on several occasions executed detention orders for frivolous and vexatious reasons. The writ represents an administrative check and balance between an individual and the State. However, the said writ has certain limitations. It is only confined to procedural non-compliance. If a particular law allows for detention without trial, then the writ will not be a useful remedy.
The writ, described by Blackstone as the "great and efficacious writ, in all manner of illegal confinement" (see William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Law of England, Vol 3, 1st edn, 1765 at p 131), functions as a judicial remedy aims at preventing the arbitrary use of executive powers to imprison individuals unlawfully. The use of the writ has its roots in English common law dating back to the 14th century. It was first expressed in the Magna Carta of 1215, which stated that: "No free man shall be seized, or imprisoned, or disseized, or outlawed, or exiled, or injured in any way, nor we will enter on him or send against him except by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. (Chua Kian Voon v. Menteri Dalam Negeri & Ors  1 CLJ 747 FC).
Rising cost of living sending Johoreans back to Singapore
The majority of locals who returned to Johor when the border with Singapore was closed due to the Covid-19 pandemic, have gone back to the island republic. Johor business groups say the locals decided to seek employment in Singapore again for various reasons, including the rising cost of living in Malaysia. Johor Indian Muslim Entre-preneur Association (Perusim) secretary Hussein Ibrahim said only a small group of people remained in Johor.
Australia to fast-track visa applications for skilled migrants
The Australian government has announced it will fast-track permanent visa applications for skilled workers. Clare O’Neil minister for home affairs said recently department resources will be diverted to prioritise visa applications for highly skilled workers overseas, reported Xinhua quoting Australian Financial Review (AFR). The Covid-19 pandemic shut off the pipeline for skilled migrants to Australia with borders closed for almost two years creating a significant backlog in visa applications. More than 600,000 temporary visa holders left Australia while borders were closed causing staffing shortages in the health, construction and hospitality industries.
Government opens up more sectors for foreign workers from India
Malaysia has agreed to open up more sectors for foreign workers from India, says Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan. “Recently, the Home Affairs Ministry and Human Resources Ministry joint committee have approved other sectors,” he said briefly while answering questions from lawmakers during the tabling of the Employees' Social Security (Amendment) 2022 Bill in the Dewan Rakyat on Thursday (July 21).
Landmark agreement between Uber Australia and union
In Australia, a landmark agreement between Uber and the Transport Workers' union could see gig economy workers given fairer wages, the right to collective bargaining, and guaranteed protections. The two parties signed a "statement of principles" last month agreeing to support the creation of a new independent commission which would apply minimum standards and practices across the industry. Two New Zealand Unions have taken a case against Uber in the High Court - seeking to overturn the presumption that Uber drivers are independent contractors. The judge's decision is reserved, but it could have far reaching implications. Kathryn discusses the Australian agreement with Alex Veen, Scholarly Teaching Fellow in Work and Organisational Studies, at the University of Sydney.
Workers in Philippines most stressed in South-East Asia, says global poll
Sign Up for e-Bulletin
Subscribe to our FREE CLJ & LLB Bulletins
Emails sent to you weekly with the latest updates on the law.