Back to Top

Issue #18/2018
03 May 2018

To get the most out of this law bulletin and have full access to judgments and other materials, subscribe to CLJLaw today.

Feel free to forward this bulletin to your colleagues. Sign-up to receive this bulletin directly via email.

New This Week

  1. Case(s) of the Week

    1. BAR MALAYSIA v. KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI [2018] 4 CLJ 635

  2. Appeal Update

    1. Appeal Update

  3. Latest Cases

    1. Legal Network Series

    2. CLJ 2018 Volume 4 (Part 5)

  4. Articles

    1. LNS Article(s)

  5. Legislation Highlights

    1. Principal Acts

    2. Amending Acts

    3. PU(A)

    4. PU(B)

    5. Legislation Alert

CASE(S) OF THE WEEK

BAR MALAYSIA v. KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI [2018] 4 CLJ 635
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
KAMALUDIN MD SAID J
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: WA-24-12-03-2017]
02 APRIL 2018
[2018] CLJ JT(2)

LEGAL PROFESSION: Professional privilege – Communication between solicitor and client – Privilege against disclosure – Evidence Act 1950, s. 126 – Whether subject to and caught by s. 142(5) of Income Tax Act 1967 – Demand for disclosure of communication by Director General of Inland Revenue – Whether illegal and unlawful – Whether in breach of Evidence Act 1950 and Legal Profession Act 1976

REVENUE LAW: Director General of Inland Revenue – Powers and functions – Power of access to buildings and documents – Evidential provisions – Income Tax Act 1967, ss. 80(1) & 142(5) – Effect and purport – Whether having overriding effect on other written law – Whether could prevail over s. 126 of Evidence Act 1950 – Documents forming part of solicitor-client communication – Whether privileged and protected from disclosure

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction of statutes – Conflicting statutes – Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA), s. 142(5) – Evidence Act 1950 (EA), s. 126 – Whether s. 142(5) overrides or is subject to s. 126 EA – Chapter IX Part III of EA – Whether unaffected by operation of ITA – Generalia specialibus non derogant – Non-obstante clause – Applicability


APPEAL UPDATE  
  1. Chong Tat Siong lwn Pendakwa Raya [2017] 1 LNS 2037 (CA) mengesahkan kes Mahkamah Tinggi PP lwn Chong Tat Siong & Yang Lain [2015] 1 LNS 1042

  2. CS Progyms Pharmaceutical Sdn Bhd v. Blade Mate Industries Sdn Bhd [2017] 1 LNS 381 (CA) overruling in part the High Court case of Blade Mate Industries Sdn Bhd v CS Progyms Pharmaceutical Sdn Bhd [Originating Summons No: 25- 150-01/2013]

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2016] 1 LNS 1834

LIN YING-CHUN v. JOSEPH LING & ORS AND OTHER CASES

EVIDENCE: Standard of proof - Fraud - Forgery - Whether proved on balance of probability

EVIDENCE: Opinion evidence - Evidence of expert - Role of expert - Whether expert reliable - Whether evidence challenged

LAND LAW: Transfer - Fraud - Power of attorney - Whether forged - Whether proved on balance of probability

(KK-21-14, 15 and 16-2011)
For the plaintiff - Alex Decena, Christina Liew & Sherzali Herza Azli; M/s C J Liew & Co
(K-21-14-2011)
For the 1st defendant - Wong Kui Shung; M/s AY Partners
For the 2nd defendant - Deceased
For the 3rd defendant - M/s Tanggar & Co
For the 4th & 5th defendants - State Attorney General
(K-21-15-2011)
For the 1st defendant - Wong Kui Shung; M/s AY Partners
For the 2nd and 3rd defendant - State Attorney General
For the 4th defendant - Chris Thien; M/s Yap & Chin
(K-21-16-2011)
For the 1st defendant - Wong Kui Shung; M/s AY Partners
For the 2nd defendant - Deceased
For the 3rd defendant - M/s Tanggar & Co
For the 4th defendant - Melissa Tan; M/s Chee & Co
For the 5th defendant - Easy Credit Sdn Bhd
For the 6th & 7th defendants - State Attorney General

[2017] 1 LNS 1407

IBARAHIM ISMAIL lwn. PP

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Pertuduhan dibawah s. 23(1) Akta Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia 2009 ('SPRM') - Hakim bicara tidak menyatakan bahawa tertuduh berjaya menyangkal anggapan di bawah Seksyen 23(2) SPRM - Hakim bicara hanya memutuskan bahawa pembelaan telah gagal menimbulkan sebarang keraguan munasabah terhadap kes pendakwaan - Sama ada tertuduh telah diprejudiskan - Sama ada terdapat salah arah yang serius sehingga berlaku kegagalan keadilan - Sama ada kesilapan oleh hakim bicara boleh dipulihkan dibawah s. 422 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Rasuah - Penerimaan suapan secara rasuah - Pertuduhan di bawah s. 23(1) Akta Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia 2009 ('SPRM') - Penyalahgunaan kuasa untuk memilih pembekal - Tertuduh dipertanggungjawabkan untuk memilih pembekal - Tertuduh gagal mengemukakan kepentingannya dalam syarikat yang dipilih sebagai pembekal - Sama ada tertuduh berniat untuk mendapatkan keuntungan bagi dirinya - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 23(2) Akta SPRM 2009 terpakai - Sama ada pembelaan telah berjaya menimbulkan keraguan yang munasabah

 Bagi pihak perayu - Norhisham Saidi; T/n Norhisham & Co
 Bagi pihak responden - Ahmad Ghazali Muhamad Nadzri, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia 

[2017] 1 LNS 1154

GOLDENSEAL ASSETS SDN BHD lwn. LOW GEOK PAU & ANOTHER CASE

UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Kaveat - Pembatalan kaveat persendirian - Permohonan oleh pembida berjaya yang telah membuat bayaran penuh harga lelongan - Lelongan awam dijalankan melalui satu penipuan - Kaveat dimasukkan oleh tuanpunya tanah yang menjadi bare trustee - Sama ada pemohon merupakan pihak yang terkilan di bawah s. 327(1) Kanun Tanah Negara 1965 ('KTN') - Sama ada responden-responden adalah pihak yang mempunyai kepentingan boleh kaveat dibawah s. 323(1) KTN - Sama ada terdapat isu bona fide yang serius - Sama ada kaveat perlu dikekalkan

Bagi pihak pemohon - Khairul Azwad & Junaidah Jaafar; T/n Junaidah & Partner
Bagi pihak responden pertama & kedua - Jimmy Phua & TS Goh; T/n SK Song

[2017] 1 LNS 1322

PP v. BASRI TAKADIR

CRIMINAL LAW: Defence - Grave and sudden provocation - Whether provocation grave and sudden - Reasonable man test - Proportionality of injury inflicted - Whether proportionate to provocation - Penal Code, s. 300, exception 1

CRIMINAL LAW: Defence - Sudden fight - Whether prerequisites fulfilled - Whether undue advantage taken - Whether accused acted in a cruel manner - Penal Code, s. 300, exception 4

CRIMINAL LAW: Defence - Self-defence - Whether prerequisites fulfilled - Impending peril to his life or great bodily harm - Whether established - Penal Code, ss. 96, 97, 99, 102, 106

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - Prima facie - Whether established - Whether prosecution adduced credible evidence - Whether evidence if unrebutted or explained would warrant conviction - Criminal Procedure Code s. 180

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - Witness statements - Whether certified by witness - Whether contents understood - Whether should be read in open court - Criminal Procedure Code s. 402B

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - End of defence case - Whether case proved beyond reasonable doubt - Whether accused had cast reasonable doubt - Meaning of 'reasonable doubt' - Approach in evaluating evidence of defence - Criminal Procedure Code s. 182A

EVIDENCE: Burden of proof - Defences - Whether proved on balance of probabilities - Evidence Act 1950, s. 105

For the prosecution - Maisarah DPP
For the defence - Ranbir Singh

[2017] 1 LNS 1624

LUANG ENTIYANG & ORS v. UNITED TEAMTRADE SDN BHD & ORS

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Representative action - Requirements - Proof of - Whether action was a representative one - Whether action taken with consent of fellow villagers - Whether action was authorised by named plaintiffs

LAND LAW: Customary land - Right to - Methods by which customary land created - Whether created through land clearing and cultivation - Whether proved on a balance of probabilities - Sarawak Land Code, s. 5(2)

TORT: Trespass to land - Damages - Proof of - Making of police report - Whether sufficient

For the plaintiff - Chua Kuan Ching; M/s Baru Bian & Co
For the 1st & 2nd defendants - Bong Ah Loi & Peter Hii; M/s Loke King Goh & Partners
For the 3rd & 4th defendants - Lonie Pinda, Legal Officer; State Attorney General's Chambers

 


CLJ 2018 Volume 4 (Part 5)

COURT OF APPEAL

Hassan Ali Basari v. PP
Lim Yee Lan, Abdul Rahman Sebli, Zaleha Yusof JJCA
(Criminal Law - Penal Code - Section 130M - Omission to disclose information pertaining to terrorist act) [2018] 4 CLJ 561 [CA]

For the appellant - Ram Singh; M/s Ram Singh Harbans & Co
For the prosecution - Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud; DPP 

Lee Bah Hin lwn. PP
Mohtarudin Baki, Zakaria Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR
(Undang-undang Jenayah; Prosedur Jenayah - Sama ada pengedaran dadah bawah s. 37(d) atau s. 2 ADB - Sama ada anggapan berganda boleh digunakan) [2018] 4 CLJ 579 [CA]

Bagi pihak perayu - Ranjit Singh Dhillon; T/n J Kaur, Ranjit & Assocs
Bagi pihak responden - Samihah Rhazali; TPR 

Mohd Afrizan Hussain v. Thein Hong Teck & Ors And Another Appeal
Alizatul Khair Osman, Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, Varghese George JJCA
(Partnership - Winding-up - Requirement of having more than five members at time of presentation of petition - Insolvency of partners - Effect on partnership) [2018] 4 CLJ 593 [CA]

(Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCC)-322-02-2013)
For the appellant - Amir Asree Meor Nordin; M/s Zainul Rijal Talha & Amir
For the respondents - Manpal Singh Sacdev, Vikram Singh, Rabinder Singh & Juliana Johari; M/s Rabinder Budiman & Assocs
(Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCC)-323-02-2013)
For the appellant - V Sithambaram & A Ruebankumar; M/s Ahmad Rizal, Sara Idylla & Co
For the respondents - Manpal Singh Sacdev, Vikram Singh, Rabinder Singh & Juliana Johari; M/s Rabinder, Budiman & Assocs 

PT Gunung Madu Plantations v. Muhammad Jimmy Goh Mashun
Lim Yee Lan, Idrus Harun JJCA, Yeoh Wee Siam J
(Civil Procedure - Forum conveniens - High Court - Extra-territorial jurisdiction in cases where foreigners are sued as co-defendants with local residents) [2018] 4 CLJ 616 [CA]

For the appellant - Daphne Koo; M/s Rahmat Lim & Partners
For the respondent - Yee Mei Ken & Teh Soo Jin; M/s Shearn Delamore & Co 

HIGH COURT

Bar Malaysia v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri
Kamaludin Md Said J
(Legal Profession; Revenue Law; Statutory Interpretation - Professional privilege - Communication between solicitor and client - Director General of Inland Revenue - Powers and functions - Power of access to buildings and documents - Construction of statutes) [2018] 4 CLJ 635 [HC]

For the plaintiff - Anand Raj & Foong Pui Chi; M/s Shearn Delamore & Co
For the defendant - Ahmad Ishak Mohd Hassan & Ruzaidah Yaacob; Senior Revenue Counsel; Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia 

Foo Tseh Wan v. Toyota Tsusho (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor
Collin Lawrence Sequerah J
(Civil Procedure; Criminal Procedure - Sessions Court - Jurisdiction - Statement pursuant to s. 53(3) of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 - Admissibility) [2018] 4 CLJ 653 [HC]

For the applicant - Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin, Elina Abdul Rashid & Tiara Katrina; M/s The Chambers of Kamarul Hisham & Hasnal Rezua
For the 1st respondent - Magita Hari Mogan & Ragunath Kesavan; M/s Skrine
For the 2nd respondent - Khazrin Haffiz Khalil; DPP 

Pacific & Orient Insurance Bhd v. Rasip Hamsudi & Ors
Zalita Zaidan JC
(Insurance; Civil Procedure - Motor insurance - Claims - Notice of discontinuance before judgment in default entered - Whether judgment in default irregular) [2018] 4 CLJ 678 [HC]

For the appellant - Vinod Kamalanathan; M/s Vinod Kamalanathan & Assocs
For the respondent - Mabel Sabastian & Rajan Ayappan; M/s Sabastian & Co

Teras Maju Utara Bahan Binaan (M) Sdn Bhd v. Tetuan Ramli Amar Jit & Tan
Chan Jit Li JC
(Civil Procedure - Appeal - Notice of appeal - Whether proper service of notice of appeal) [2018] 4 CLJ 696 [HC]

For the appellant - Wong Tai Hau; M/s TH Wong & Co
For the respondent - Quah Chien Chieh & Oon Kian Wooi; M/s Ramli Amar Jit & Tan 

SUBJECT INDEX

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Action - Discontinuance of - Motor insurance claim against insurer and two others - Insurer filed notice of discontinuance before judgment in default entered by Sessions Court - All three defendants found liable - Whether insurer should have been excluded in judgment - Whether withdrawal of insurer's defence amounted to complete withdrawal of defence to proceedings - Whether judgment irregular - Whether an abuse of process of court - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19, O. 19, O. 21 rr. 2 & 3
Pacific & Orient Insurance Bhd v. Rasip Hamsudi & Ors
(Zalita Zaidan JC) [2018] 4 CLJ 678 [HC]

Appeal - Notice of appeal - Notice of appeal served on defendant within time but neither sealed nor endorsed - Second notice of appeal endorsed but remained unsealed and served out of time - Whether there was proper service of notice of appeal - Whether there was defect in appeal record - Whether there was non-compliance of O. 55 of Rules of Court 2012
Teras Maju Utara Bahan Binaan (M) Sdn Bhd v. Tetuan Ramli Amar Jit & Tan
(Chan Jit Li JC) [2018] 4 CLJ 696 [HC]

Forum conveniens - Proper forum for legal action - Action by Indonesian company against an Indonesian citizen and several Malaysian citizens - Whether High Court has extra-territorial jurisdiction in cases where foreigners are sued as co-defendants with local residents - Indonesian citizen approved unauthorised payments without Indonesian company's authorisation to Malaysian citizens - Whether Indonesian company's cause of action against Malaysian citizens arose within jurisdiction of Malaysia - Whether notice of writ out of jurisdiction permissible - Whether manifestly unjust to confine Indonesian company to remedies in Indonesia - Whether Indonesian court a suitable or appropriate forum to adjudicate Indonesian company's claims - Whether Malaysian High Court seized with jurisdiction - Whether Malaysian court forum conveniens - Whether Indonesian company sufficiently satisfied essential requirements of s. 23(1) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Rules of Court 2012, O. 11 rr. 1(1)(H), (J), O. 12 r. 10(1) & (2)
PT Gunung Madu Plantations v. Muhammad Jimmy Goh Mashun
(Lim Yee Lan, Idrus Harun JJCA, Yeoh Wee Siam J) [2018] 4 CLJ 616 [CA]

Judgments and orders - Judgment in default - Motor insurance claim against insurer and two others - Insurer filed notice of discontinuance before judgment in default entered by Sessions Court - All three defendants found liable - Whether insurer should have been excluded in judgment - Whether withdrawal of insurer's defence amounted to complete withdrawal of defence to proceedings - Whether judgment irregular - Whether an abuse of process of court - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19, O. 19, O. 21 rr. 2 & 3
Pacific & Orient Insurance Bhd v. Rasip Hamsudi & Ors
(Zalita Zaidan JC) [2018] 4 CLJ 678 [HC]

Jurisdiction - High Court - Action by Indonesian company against an Indonesian citizen and several Malaysian citizens - Whether High Court has extra-territorial jurisdiction in cases where foreigners are sued as co-defendants with local residents - Indonesian citizen approved unauthorised payments without Indonesian company's authorisation to Malaysian citizens - Whether Indonesian company's cause of action against Malaysian citizens arose within jurisdiction of Malaysia - Whether notice of writ out of jurisdiction permissible - Whether manifestly unjust to confine Indonesian company to remedies in Indonesia - Whether Indonesian court a suitable or appropriate forum to adjudicate Indonesian company's claims - Whether Malaysian High Court seized with jurisdiction - Whether Malaysian court forum conveniens - Whether Indonesian company sufficiently satisfied essential requirements of s. 23(1) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Rules of Court 2012, O. 11 rr. 1(1)(H), (J), O. 12 r. 10(1) & (2)
PT Gunung Madu Plantations v. Muhammad Jimmy Goh Mashun
(Lim Yee Lan, Idrus Harun JJCA, Yeoh Wee Siam J) [2018] 4 CLJ 616 [CA]

Sessions Court - Jurisdiction - Applicant sought revision of Sessions Court's order in allowing applicant's statement to be tendered in a civil suit - Applicant made statement pursuant to s. 53(3) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 - First respondent applied to Criminal Sessions Court for applicant's statement to be used in a civil suit - Whether Sessions Court Judge had jurisdiction to hear and grant orders sought - Whether there was originating process or existing civil suit before court - Whether first respondent had locus standi before Criminal Sessions Court - Failure to cite applicant as party in proceedings - Whether statement given by applicant a privileged document and could not be used at trial in Civil High Court - Whether order made by Sessions Court in exercise of its criminal jurisdiction in granting reliefs ultra vires and wrong in law - Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009, ss. 10(4)(b), 10(5) & 30 - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 113
Foo Tseh Wan v. Toyota Tsusho (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Collin Lawrence Sequerah J) [2018] 4 CLJ 653 [HC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Penal Code - Section 130M - Omission to disclose information pertaining to terrorist act - Accused convicted and sentenced to seven years imprisonment - Appeal against conviction - Grounds of appeal - Whether trial judge properly considered accused's defence - Intercepted communications between accused and another - Whether admissible in court - Whether appeal ought to be allowed
Hassan Ali Basari v. PP
(Lim Yee Lan, Abdul Rahman Sebli, Zaleha Yusof JJCA) [2018] 4 CLJ 561 [CA]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Statements - Admissibility - Applicant made statement pursuant to s. 53(3) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 - First respondent applied to Criminal Sessions Court for applicant's statement to be used in a civil suit - Whether statement given by applicant a privileged document and could not be used at trial in Civil High Court - Voluntariness of statement - Whether could be determined - Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009, ss. 10(4)(b), 10(5) & 30 - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 113
Foo Tseh Wan v. Toyota Tsusho (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Collin Lawrence Sequerah J) [2018] 4 CLJ 653 [HC]

INSURANCE

Motor insurance - Claims - Claim against insurer and two others - Insurer added as third defendant - Insurer filed notice of discontinuance before judgment in default entered by Sessions Court - All three defendants found liable - Whether insurer should have been excluded in judgment - Whether judgment irregular - Whether an abuse of process of court - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19, O. 19, O. 21 rr. 2 & 3
Pacific & Orient Insurance Bhd v. Rasip Hamsudi & Ors
(Zalita Zaidan JC) [2018] 4 CLJ 678 [HC]

LEGAL PROFESSION

Professional privilege - Communication between solicitor and client - Privilege against disclosure - Evidence Act 1950, s. 126 - Whether subject to and caught by s. 142(5) of Income Tax Act 1967 - Demand for disclosure of communication by Director General of Inland Revenue - Whether illegal and unlawful - Whether in breach of Evidence Act 1950 and Legal Profession Act 1976
Bar Malaysia v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri
(Kamaludin Md Said J) [2018] 4 CLJ 635 [HC]

PARTNERSHIP

Liabilities of partner - Bankrupt partner - Whether automatically disqualified as partners - Power of attorney to 'do and perform all acts or things and/or exercise all powers and rights of donor as partner of partnership' - Whether strictly construed - Whether general words which do not confer general powers - Whether other partners consented for donee to be a partner in place of bankrupt partner - Bankruptcy Act 1967, s. 38(1)(b)
Mohd Afrizan Hussain v. Thein Hong Teck & Ors And Another Appeal
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, Varghese George JJCA) [2018] 4 CLJ 593 [CA]

Winding-up - Setting aside - Requirement of having more than five members at time of presentation of petition - Whether complied with - Insolvency of partners - Whether sanction of Director General of Insolvency obtained prior to presentation of petition - Whether trustee of bankrupt member could be considered a member in partnership - Whether winding up order null and void - Bankruptcy Act 1967, s. 38(1)(b) - Companies Act 1965, ss. 314 & 315
Mohd Afrizan Hussain v. Thein Hong Teck & Ors And Another Appeal
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, Varghese George JJCA) [2018] 4 CLJ 593 [CA]

REVENUE LAW

Director General of Inland Revenue - Powers and functions - Power of access to buildings and documents - Evidential provisions - Income Tax Act 1967, ss. 80(1) & 142(5) - Effect and purport - Whether having overriding effect on other written law - Whether could prevail over s. 126 of Evidence Act 1950 - Documents forming part of solicitor-client communication - Whether privileged and protected from disclosure
Bar Malaysia v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri
(Kamaludin Md Said J) [2018] 4 CLJ 635 [HC]

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

Construction of statutes - Conflicting statutes - Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA), s. 142(5) - Evidence Act 1950 (EA), s. 126 - Whether s. 142(5) overrides or is subject to s. 126 EA - Chapter IX Part III of EA - Whether unaffected by operation of ITA - Generalia specialibus non derogant - Non-obstante clause - Applicability
Bar Malaysia v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri
(Kamaludin Md Said J) [2018] 4 CLJ 635 [HC]

INDEKS PERKARA

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH

Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 ('ADB') - Seksyen 39B(1)(a) - Mengedar dadah jenis heroin seberat 10.99g dan monoacetylmorphines seberat 10.75g - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Alasan-alasan rayuan - Kegagalan hakim bicara menyatakan dapatannya sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan pengedaran bawah s. 37(d) atau s. 2 ADB - Sama ada hakim bicara terkhilaf apabila menggunakan anggapan berganda iaitu s. 37(d) dan s. 37(da)(iiia) di akhir perbicaraan - Sama ada hakim bicara gagal mempertimbangkan isu pengedaran
Lee Bah Hin lwn. PP
(Mohtarudin Baki, Zakaria Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR) [2018] 4 CLJ 579 [CA]

PROSEDUR JENAYAH

Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952, s. 39B(1)(a) - Pengedaran dadah jenis heroin seberat 10.99g dan monoacetylmorphines seberat 10.75g - Alasan-alasan rayuan - Kegagalan hakim bicara menyatakan dapatannya sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan pengedaran bawah s. 37(d) atau s. 2 - Sama ada hakim bicara terkhilaf apabila menggunakan anggapan berganda iaitu s. 37(d) dan s. 37(da)(iiia) di akhir perbicaraan - Sama ada hakim bicara gagal mempertimbangkan isu pengedaran
Lee Bah Hin lwn. PP
(Mohtarudin Baki, Zakaria Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR) [2018] 4 CLJ 579 [CA]


ARTICLES

LNS Article(s)

  1. PROPERTY RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN UNDER CUSTOMARY LAW IN NIGERIA: MYTH OR REALITY* [Read excerpt]
    GRACE, OGONDA AKOLOKWU* BARAKAT, A. RAJI** [2018] 1 LNS(A) xxxv

  2. [2018] 1 LNS(A) xxxv
    logo
    NIGERIA

    PROPERTY RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN UNDER CUSTOMARY LAW IN NIGERIA:
    MYTH OR REALITY*


    GRACE, OGONDA AKOLOKWU*
    BARAKAT, A. RAJI**

    Abstract

    The Nigerian Constitution recognizes and establishes certain rights that are fundamental to its citizens. These Constitutional provisions apply to all citizens including married women. However, in spite of these provisions and the provisions in other international instruments, women still experience infringements of their rights to own property simply because they are females and also because the different customary laws applicable in Nigeria dictate and approve same. Customs still regulate the way of life of the people in Nigeria and so cannot be downplayed or wished away by modern legislations as the laws derivable from them continue to play a significant role in regulating the lives of persons to whom they apply. These customary laws are still recognized limitations to the property rights of women in Nigeria. By the practice of these laws variously pronounced as obnoxious and barbaric by our courts, incentives to excel are smothered and killed in women who have become schooled to accept the faulty acculturation and socialization outcomes that it is a man's world and women are just necessary adjuncts to complement the man within limits permitted by culture. This paper re-establishes the plight of women in Nigeria as it identifies the negative role of our customary laws which on a continuous basis make the enjoyment of property rights for woman; and which right is inherent in all human beings a mirage and an unfulfilled dream. The paper calls for more legal interventions and proper enforcement of rights of women in Nigeria.

    . . .

    *Grace, Ogonda Akolokwu (PhD), Department of Private and Property Law, Faculty of Law, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria & Barakat,

    **Adebisi Raji (PhD), Department of Jurisprudence and International Law, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
  3. MUSLIMS SHOULD PAY MORE ATTENTION TO HUMAN RELATIONS* [Read excerpt]
    DAUD BATCHELOR [2018] 1 LNS(A) xxxvi

  4. [2018] 1 LNS(A) xxxvi
    logo
    MALAYSIA

    MUSLIMS SHOULD PAY MORE ATTENTION TO HUMAN RELATIONS*

    DAUD BATCHELOR

    The contemporary situation in much of the Muslim world suggests to us that, while teachings on ibadat (ritual worship, including prayer, fasting, zakat, hajj) have been faithfully conveyed to many of us by our Imams, instruction in the other category of Islamic law, mu'amalat (civil transactions and social interactions), has generally been given less attention. This has led to shortcomings in the Muslim world, especially in the context of our duty to provide an exemplary moral example for the rest of humanity.

    Mu'amalat focuses on the relationship between people (hablum minannass), rather than between man and his Creator (hablum minAllah). In rather broad terms, it can be considered as encompassing the fields of Islamic banking, finance and economics, national governance, and the justice system. It can even be said to include good manners (adab). Indications that Muslim countries are lagging behind in these fields come from Scheherazade Rehman and Hossein Askari's publication, "How Islamic are Islamic Countries?" In this article, the authors rated 208 Muslim and non-Muslims countries based on their perceived adherence to Qur'anic teachings and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

    . . .

    * Published with kind permission of the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IAIS) Malaysia. (www.iais.org.my).


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

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealing
ACT 803 Anti-Fake News Act 2018 11 April 2018 [PU(B) 174/2018] -
ACT 802 Private Aged Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 2018 Not Yet In Force -
ACT 801 Finance (No. 2) Act 2017 As provided in the Act except s 20 - 23; 1 January 2018 [PU(B) 610/2017] - s 20, 21 and 23; 1 October 2018 [PU(B) 610/2017] - s 22 -
ACT 800 Employment Insurance System Act 2017 1 January 2018 [PU(B) 606/2017] -
ACT 799 Malaysian Border Security Agency Act 2017 29 December 2017 [PU(B) 595/2017] -

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1565 Supplementary Supply (2017) Act 2018 10 April 2018  
ACT A1564 Care Centres (Amendment) Act 2018 Not Yet In Force ACT 506
ACT A1563 Arbitration (Amendment) Act 2018 28 February 2018 [PU(B) 101/2018] ACT 646
ACT A1562 Tourism Industry (Amendment) Act 2018 Not Yet In Force ACT 482
ACT A1561 Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (Amendment) Act 2018 11 January 2018 ACT 633

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(A) 105/2018 Federal Roads (West Malaysia) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2018 20 April 2018 23 April 2018 PU(A) 401/1989
PU(A) 104/2018 Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) (Remission of Tax and Stamp Duty) (No. 2) Order 2018 19 April 2018 20 April 2018 ACT 96
PU(A) 103/2018 Malay Reservations (Federal Territory) (Amendment of Third Schedule) Order 2018 16 April 2018 17 April 2018 - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur only F.M.S CAP. 142
PU(A) 102/2018 Malay Reservations (Federal Territory) (Amendment of Second Schedule) Order 2018 16 April 2018 17 April 2018 - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur only F.M.S CAP. 142
PU(A) 101/2018 Water Services Industry (Water Reticulation and Plumbing) (Amendment) Rules 2018 13 April 2018 14 April 2018 except the provisions specified in subrule 1(3); 1 January 2020 - subrule 1(3) PU(A) 36/2014

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(B) 226/2018 Notice Under Subregulation 11(5A) - Corrigendum 27 April 2018   PU(B) 188/2018
PU(B) 225/2018 Notice Under Subregulation 11(5A) - Corrigendum 27 April 2018   PU(B) 188/2018
PU(B) 224/2018 Notice Under Subregulation 11(5A) - Corrigendum 27 April 2018   PU(B) 188/2018
PU(B) 223/2018 Notice Under Subregulation 11(5A) - Corrigendum 27 April 2018   PU(B) 188/2018
PU(B) 222/2018 Notice Under Subregulation 11(5A) - Corrigendum 27 April 2018   PU(B) 188/2018

Legislation Alert

Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended
PU(A) 36/2014 Water Services Industry (Water Reticulation and Plumbing) Rules 2014 PU(A) 101/2018 14 April 2018 except the provisions specified in subrule 1(3); 1 January 2020 - subrule 1(3) First Schedule
F.M.S CAP. 142 Malay Reservations Enactment [As Applicable to the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur] PU(A) 103/2018 17 April 2018 - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur only Third Schedule
F.M.S CAP. 142 Malay Reservations Enactment [As Applicable to the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur] PU(A) 102/2018 17 April 2018 - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur only Second Schedule
ACT 438 Free Zones Act 1990 PU(B) 170/2018 10 April 2018 First Schedule
ACT 438 Free Zones Act 1990 PU(B) 163/2018 6 April 2018 First Schedule

Revoked

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from
PU(B) 366/2016 Notice of Polling Districts and Polling Centres For the Federal and State Constituencies of the States of Malaya - Corrigendum PU(B) 157/2018 31 March 2018
PU(B) 197/2016 Notice of Polling Districts and Polling Centres For the Federal and State Constituencies of the States of Malaya PU(B) 157/2018 31 March 2018
PU(B) 303/2016 Determination and Revocation of Determination of Lowest Pension Under Section 25 PU(B) 116/2018 1 January 2018
PU(B) 304/2016 Determination and Revocation of Determination of Lowest Pension Under Section 22A PU(B) 115/2018 1 January 2018
PU(A) 429/2017 Passports (Exemption of Visa to Holder of Passport For Public Affairs of the People's Republic of China) Order 2017 PU(A) 74/2018 5 January 2018 to 31 December 2018