Back to Top

Issue #41/2020
01 October 2020

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

CASE(S) OF THE WEEK

LIM CHOON SENG v. LIM POH KWEE [2020] 9 CLJ 1
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
AZAHAR MOHAMED CJ (MALAYA); ROHANA YUSUF FCJ; ABANG ISKANDAR FCJ;
NALLINI PATHMANATHAN FCJ; ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI FCJ
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: 02(F)-16-03-2019(J)]
29 JULY 2020
[2020] CLJ JT(6)

The Court of Appeal herein cannot in law effectively reverse the separate orders of the High Court made in separate but similar proceedings dealing with separate defendants when what the appellate court had before it was only a single appeal lodged as a test case by one of the defendants, and not separate appeals lodged by the defendants separately. The mere existence of an agreement between the defendants to be bound by the decision in the test case cannot in law exempt the other defendants from lodging their own notices of appeal against the High Court decision, what more when there was no order or direction by the High Court to consolidate the suits or treat them as one proceeding; to each his own liability.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Notice of appeal - Procedure - Appeal to Court of Appeal - Treatment of test case on appeal vis-a-vis other related cases - Whether separate notices of appeal should have been filed - Whether existence of agreement between parties to be bound by decision in test case could exempt other parties from lodging their own notices of appeal against decision - Whether liabilities separate and distinct - Whether Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to set aside decision in absence of any appeal by other parties - Whether no order could be made for or against or bind non-party - Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994


PP v. TENGKU ADNAN TENGKU MANSOR [2020] 9 CLJ 30
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
NALLINI PATHMANATHAN FCJ; VERNON ONG LAM KIAT FCJ; ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05(L)-18-02-2020(W)]
17 JULY 2020

The guilty plea of a co-accused in a joint trial cannot be used as evidence to the detriment of the other co-accused who did not plead guilty. Criminal justice guarantees the fair trial of the remaining co-accused and demands that the facts pertaining to the charge be adduced and proven afresh against him. The presiding judge hearing the joint trial must thus consider the case against the latter separately and independently, and decide the same based on the set of evidence against him. The other co-accused, by not pleading guilty, has a sacrosanct right to be heard and to defend himself.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Judge - Recusal - Application for - Joint trial for persons giving and accepting bribe - Co-accused pleaded guilty - Allegation that trial judge heard and recorded facts of case involving co-accused and co-accused agreed to become prosecution witness - Whether there was 'real danger of bias' on part of trial judge in hearing case involving co-accused who had not pleaded guilty - Whether guilty plea of co-accused evidence against other accused who had not pleaded guilty - Whether trial judge ought to recuse himself


JUDICIAL QUOTES

“The concept of secret trust, which is part of the law of trust and is governed by the rules of equity and the common law of England, is applicable in Malaysia subject to the proviso to s. 3(1) of the Civil Law Act 1956 unless there is an explicit abrogation, variation, restriction or modification by written law.”

“The concept is statutorily applicable in Malaysia; what is apparent is that the Malaysian Wills Act 1959 or other statutes or Acts of Parliament do not explicitly abrogate the application of secret trust. The proviso to s. 3(1)(a) of the Civil Law Act 1956 too does not exclude the applicability of the law on trust and secret trust. This is because the court upholds secret trust to prevent fraud on a testator and the rules of equity are applied to compel the trustee under a will to fulfil his promises to the testator.”

“In our considered view, there is no cogent reason to 'abrogate' secret trust in Malaysia. There are circumstances in which a testator creates 'secret trust' to facilitate the intention to provide for certain parties.” – per Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJ in Chin Jhin Thien & Anor v. Chin Huat Yean & Anor [2020] 7 CLJ 137

For more Judicial Quotes, please login and view under "References" or subscribe to CLJLaw.


LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2019] 1 LNS 456

LIBERTY EQUITY SDN BHD lwn. KETUA PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN & YANG LAIN

Alamat yang didaftarkan di dalam Sistem Pungutan Hasil Tanah ('SPHT') merupakan alamat yang terakhir diketahui dan penyerahan notis tuntutan berkanun 6A Kanun Tanah Negara 1965 di alamat yang didaftarkan di dalam SPHT tersebut adalah teratur. Ia adalah tanggungjawab pemilik untuk memaklumkan berkenaan sebarang penukaran alamat bagi membolehkan bil cukai dan sebarang notis dapat diserahkan ke alamat yang betul.

UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Pelucuthakan - Kesahihan - Tanah dilucuthakan akibat kegagalan pemilik membayar cukai tanah - Penyerahan notis tuntutan berkanun 6A Kanun Tanah Negara 1965 ('Notis 6A') - Sama ada penyerahan Notis 6A di alamat sepertimana yang dinyatakan di dalam Sistem Pungutan Hasil Tanah adalah sempurna - Sama ada ia adalah tanggungjawab pemilik untuk memaklumkan berkenaan pertukaran alamat - Sama ada pemilik boleh mempertikaikan penyerahan Notis 6A setelah notis tersebut telah diterima olehnya melalui pos AR berdaftar - Kanun Tanah Negara 1965, ss. 97, 98 & 431

UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Pelucuthakan - Kesahihan - Tanah dilucuthakan akibat kegagalan membayar cukai tanah - Kelewatan - Tindakan diambil 3 tahun selepas dimaklumkan berkenaan pelucuthakan - Sama ada tindakan plaintif adalah di luar tempoh masa yang ditetapkan di bawah ss 418 dan 134(1) Kanun Tanah Negara 1965 - Sama ada plaintif seharusnya merayu dalam tempoh masa 3 bulan setelah keputusan dimaklumkan

  • Bagi pihak perayu - Nahvinah Selvaraj; T/n AJ Ariffin, Yeo & Harpal
  • Bagi pihak responden - Nurul Husna Lucyia & Zulhary Abdul Rashid; Kamar Penasihat Undang-Undang

[2019] 1 LNS 463

NELSON YESU lwn. ASMADI MAT & SATU LAGI

Kelewatan dalam penyerahan notis rayuan yang disebabkan oleh kecuaian kerani peguamcara yang terlepas pandang merupakan alasan yang remeh untuk mahkamah menggunakan budi bicara untuk mempertimbangkan suatu permohonan perlanjutan masa penyampaian notis rayuan.

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Rayuan - Notis rayuan - Perlanjutan masa - Kelewatan hampir 5 hari untuk menyampaikan notis rayuan - Kecuaian penyampaian notis rayuan - Kerani peguamcara terlepas pandang - Budi bicara mahkamah - Sama ada sebab dan keadaan yang menyebabkan kepada berlakunya 'terlepas pandang' telah dijelaskan di dalam afidavit peguamcara dan kerani peguamcara - Sama ada terdapat sebab dan alasan yang baik dan munasabah mengenai kelewatan untuk Mahkamah menggunakan budi bicaranya untuk membenarkan perlanjutan masa - Sama ada A. 55 k. 5(2) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 merupakan peruntukan yang mandatori yang perlu dipatuhi - Sama ada alasan 'terlepas pandang' adalah remeh 

  • Bagi pihak perayu - C Sivasankar; T/n GK Sritharan & Co
  • Bagi pihak responden - Idza Hajar; T/n Zul Rafique & Partners

[2019] 1 LNS 466

MINES RESORT SDN BHD (DALAM PENGGULUNGAN) lwn. JMB MINES-HERITAGE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION

Injunksi interlokutori harus dibenarkan untuk mengekalkan status quo yang asal dengan mengaktifkan kad akses iaitu keadaan sebelum daripada semua pertikaian antara pihak-pihak terjadi. Arahan untuk pengaktifan semula kad akses dan selanjutnya untuk tidak menyahaktifkan kad akses sementara menunggu pelupusan tindakan adalah berbentuk menghalang sifatnya untuk mengekalkan status quo. Injunksi interlokutori wajar diberikan apabila ganti rugi adalah tidak memadai untuk membayar kerugian perniagaan yang dialami plaintif akibat sekatan kad akses.

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Injunksi - Injunksi interlokutori - Pengekalan status quo - Badan pengurusan bersama menyekat akses pemaju ke beberapa unit kediaman yang dimilikinya dengan menyahaktifkan kad akses akibat tunggakan caj penyelenggaraan - Sama ada segala keperluan undang-undang di bawah A. 29 k. 1(2A) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 telah dipenuhi - Sama ada terdapat persoalan yang serius untuk dibicarakan - Sama ada status quo perlu dikekalkan sehingga pelupusan penuh tindakan - Sama ada status quo yang asal adalah ketika kad akses masih aktif dan boleh digunakan untuk mengakses ke unit pemaju - Sama ada arahan mengaktifkan kad ases adalah berbentuk mandatori atau menghalang sifatnya - Sama ada ganti rugi adalah memadai untuk dibayar jika sekatan kas akses akan menjejaskan perniagaan pemaju

  • Bagi pihak plaintif - Vinesh Mathew Varghese; T/n Teja Singh Penesar & Co
  • Bagi pihak defendan - Ng Yew Huoi & Nesamalar Kannan; T/n Yew Huoi, How & Associates

[2019] 1 LNS 824

BANK PERTANIAN MALAYSIA BERHAD v. STOCK HARVEST SDN BHD

The onus lies upon the caveator to show proof that it has a caveatable interest over the land. The mere existence of a deed of assignment or such other contractual interest and issuance of consent to transfer land by the state authority does not fall within the legal ambit of caveatable interest under s. 323 of National Land Code. A caveat should be removed when there are no sufficient grounds in law to support maintenance of the caveat.

LAND LAW: Caveat - Private caveat - Removal of caveat - Caveatable interest - Application by chargee - Caveator entered into sale and purchase agreement and deed of assignment with chargor - Whether caveator has caveatable interest over land - Whether mere contractual interest accrued from a deed of assignment could create a caveatable interest - Whether issuance of consent to transfer by state authority could create caveatable interest - What amounts to caveatable interest - Whether there were sufficient grounds in law to support maintenance of caveat - National Land Code, s. 323

WORDS AND PHRASES: 'any right to such title or interest' - Meaning of - Section 323(1) of National Land Code - Caveatable interest - Whether would mean personal or contractual rights

  • For the plaintiff - Ratha Govindasamy; M/s Skrine & Co
  • For the defendant - Zainal Narudin; M/s Fai Zainal & Co

[2019] 1 LNS 878

DAN-BUNKERING (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD v. THE SHIP OR VESSEL "PDZ MEWAH" (IMO NO.: 9064009) OF PORT KLANG & ANOR

A party who has willingly and voluntarily submitted itself to the jurisdiction of the court by intervening in an admiralty action in rem thus concedes that there are questions and issues to be tried between the parties and is therefore estopped from claiming that it has been wrongly made a party to the said action. Hence, the intervening party should remain a necessary and proper party in the action for effective and complete adjudication of the dispute between parties.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Parties - Misjoinder - Admiralty action in rem - Application by 2nd defendant to withdraw as a party - 2nd defendant on its volition had earlier made itself a party by intervening - Whether 2nd defendant had willingly and voluntarily submitted itself to jurisdiction of admiralty court - Whether 2nd defendant agreed that issues to be adjudged in rem action will directly affect its interest - Whether 2nd defendant conceded there were issues to be tried - Whether 2nd defendant should be estopped from insisting leave be obtained by plaintiff from winding up court - Whether 2nd defendant should remain a party to the action

  • For the plaintiff - Onn Thian Seng & Wiwin Abdul Kahar; M/s T S Oon & Partners
  • For the 1st respondent - Kunamony Kandiah; M/s Mohd Latip & Associates
  • For the 2nd defendant - Lim Wei Han; M/s The Law Office of Hann

CLJ 2020 Volume 9 (Part 1)

The Court of Appeal herein cannot in law effectively reverse the separate orders of the High Court made in separate but similar proceedings dealing with separate defendants when what the appellate court had before it was only a single appeal lodged as a test case by one of the defendants, and not separate appeals lodged by the defendants separately. The mere existence of an agreement between the defendants to be bound by the decision in the test case cannot in law exempt the other defendants from lodging their own notices of appeal against the High Court decision, what more when there was no order or direction by the High Court to consolidate the suits or treat them as one proceeding; to each his own liability.
Lim Choon Seng v. Lim Poh Kwee [2020] 9 CLJ 1 [FC]

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Notice of appeal - Procedure - Appeal to Court of Appeal - Treatment of test case on appeal vis-a-vis other related cases - Whether separate notices of appeal should have been filed - Whether existence of agreement between parties to be bound by decision in test case could exempt other parties from lodging their own notices of appeal against decision - Whether liabilities separate and distinct - Whether Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to set aside decision in absence of any appeal by other parties - Whether no order could be made for or against or bind non-party - Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994

 

 

AZAHAR MOHAMED CJ (MALAYA)
ROHANA YUSUF FCJ
ABANG ISKANDAR FCJ
NALLINI PATHMANATHAN FCJ
ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI FCJ

  • For the appellant - John Mathew, Tan Koon Heo & Edward Kuruvilla; M/s KH Tan & Co
  • For the respondent - Wong Lian Chin, Tunku Amiruddin Tunku Yusof, S Janagasutha D Sivayogarajan, William Lian Chin & Quek Kia Ping; M/s Tunku Amiruddin & K K Chew

The guilty plea of a co-accused in a joint trial cannot be used as evidence to the detriment of the other co-accused who did not plead guilty. Criminal justice guarantees the fair trial of the remaining co-accused and demands that the facts pertaining to the charge be adduced and proven afresh against him. The presiding judge hearing the joint trial must thus consider the case against the latter separately and independently, and decide the same based on the set of evidence against him. The other co-accused, by not pleading guilty, has a sacrosanct right to be heard and to defend himself.
PP v. Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor [2020] 9 CLJ 30 [FC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Judge - Recusal - Application for - Joint trial for persons giving and accepting bribe - Co-accused pleaded guilty - Allegation that trial judge heard and recorded facts of case involving co-accused and co-accused agreed to become prosecution witness - Whether there was 'real danger of bias' on part of trial judge in hearing case involving co-accused who had not pleaded guilty - Whether guilty plea of co-accused evidence against other accused who had not pleaded guilty - Whether trial judge ought to recuse himself

 

 

NALLINI PATHMANATHAN FCJ
VERNON ONG LAM KIAT FCJ
ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI FCJ

  • For the appellant - Manoj Kumar, Julia Ibrahim & Lailawati Ali; DPPs
  • For the respondent - Tan Hock Chuan, Satharamban, Michelle Lai, Natalie Tan & Aaron Lau; M/s Tan Hock Chuan & Co

The application for leave to challenge the validity of the appointment of the Chief Minister of Sabah ought to be allowed as the questions of law posed were of great constitutional effect and should be resolved in order to give certainty to the law. The applicant too had fulfilled the threshold as provided under s. 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964. The dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly, likewise, had not rendered the issue sought to be resolved and determined by the apex court academic.
Tan Sri Musa Hj Aman v. Tun Datuk Seri Panglima Hj Juhar Hj Mahiruddin & Anor And Another Application [2020] 9 CLJ 44 [FC]

|

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Application for leave to appeal - Application under s. 96(b) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Tussle for position of Chief Minister of Sabah ('CM') - Subsequent CM appointed as result of defection of several State Assemblymen - Challenge against validity of appointment - Whether issues of public importance - Whether questions of law related to effect of Sabah Constitution - Whether issue became academic upon dissolution of State Legislative Assembly - Whether questions of law fell within ambit of s. 96(b)

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Executive - Chief Minister - Tussle for position of Chief Minister of Sabah ('CM') - Subsequent CM appointed as result of defection of several State Assemblymen - Challenge against validity of appointment - Whether appointment within confines of Sabah Constitution - Whether issue became academic upon dissolution of State Legislative Assembly - Whether questions of law fell within ambit of s. 96(b) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964

 

MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ
ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI FCJ
ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF FCJ

(Civil Application No: 08(f)-497-12-2019(S))

  • For the applicant - Tengku Ahmad Fuad Tengku Burhanuddin; M/s FT Ahmad & Co
  • For the 1st respondent - Brendon Keith Soh, SAG; Dayangku Fazidah Hatun PG Bagul, Chee Chun Yen; Senior SLO, Sabah
  • For the 2nd respondent - Douglas Lind; M/s Lind Willie Wong & Chin

Watching brief:

  • For the Sabah Law Society - Roger Chin Ken Fong

(Civil Application No: 08(f)-503-12-2019(S))

  • For the applicant - Firoz Hussein Ahmad Jamaluddin & Wilson Chang; M/s FT Ahmad & Co
  • For the 1st respondent - Douglas Lind; M/s Lind Willie Wong & Chin
  • For the 2nd & 3rd respondents - Brendon Keith Soh, SAG; Dayangku Fazidah Hatun PG Bagul, Chee Chun Yen; Senior SLO, Sabah

Watching brief:

  • For the Sabah Law Society - Roger Chin Ken Fong

Tuntutan-tuntutan pemilik berdaftar sebidang tanah untuk penyerahan milikan kosong tanah tersebut kepada mereka tidak perlu diperiksa lebih lanjut melalui perbicaraan penuh untuk menyangkal hak milik mereka apabila penghuni tanpa izin tanah tersebut gagal membuktikan beliau adalah pemilik benefisial tanah tersebut, serta gagal mengemukakan keterangan untuk menunjukkan terdapat penipuan atau fraud terhadap dokumen-dokumen pindah milik tanah tersebut kepada pemilik-pemilik berdaftar. Apabila tiada isu untuk dibicarakan, permohonan pemilik-pemilik berdaftar untuk penghakiman terus di bawah A. 14 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 harus dibenarkan.
Lee Choon Beng & Yang Lain lwn. Lee Keng Wang & Yang Lain [2020] 9 CLJ 84 [CA]

|

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman terus - Permohonan - Keengganan penghuni-penghuni tanpa izin menyerahkan milikan kosong tanah kepada pemilik-pemilik berdaftar - Sama ada defendan pertama pemilik benefisial tanah - Sama ada pindah milik tanah kepada pemilik-pemilik berdaftar menyalahi undang-undang - Sama ada terdapat isu-isu yang perlu dibicarakan untuk menyangkal hak milik - Sama ada permohonan dibenarkan - Kaedah-kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 14

UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Hak milik - Penyangkalan - Sama ada pemilik-pemilik berdaftar memperoleh hak milik tanah melalui penipuan atau fraud - Keengganan penghuni-penghuni tanpa izin menyerahkan milikan kosong tanah kepada pemilik-pemilik berdaftar - Sama ada defendan pertama pemilik benefisial tanah - Sama ada terdapat isu-isu yang perlu dibicarakan untuk menyangkal hak milik pemilik-pemilik berdaftar - Sama ada permohonan untuk penghakiman terus dibenarkan - Kaedah-kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 14 - Kanun Tanah Negara, s. 340(2)(a)

 

VERNON ONG LAM KIAT HMR
YEW JEN KIE HMR
HAS ZANAH MEHAT HMR

  • Bagi pihak perayu - Jason Ong; T/n Ong & Assocs
  • Bagi pihak responden - K Kumarathiraviam; T/n Lee Hean Cheng & Co

A house purchaser in a housing development project who came to be such a purchaser through a novation agreement executed with a previous purchaser is entitled to declare as null and void a charge and a lienholder's caveat as entered into between the previous purchaser and the housing developer prior to the said novation agreement and without his consent. As a novatee, the new purchaser has stepped into the shoes of the original purchaser and is hence entitled to all rights, title and interest as so granted to the latter under the statutory sale and purchase agreement (SPA). Such a charge and caveat, if permitted to prevail, would contravene the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1996 and its 1989 Regulations, as the SPA makes it clear that the developer shall not at any time after the execution of the SPA subject the land to any encumbrances without the prior consent of the purchaser.
Ng Pak Mei v. Sierra Delima Development Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 9 CLJ 101 [CA]

|

CONTRACT: Sale and purchase agreement - Housing developers - Deed of novation - Whether novatee stepped into shoes of original purchaser - Whether novatee entitled to rights, title and interest pursuant to sale and purchase agreement - Whether Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1996 applicable to purchaser as being novatee of deed of novation - Whether developer could subject land to any encumbrances without prior consent of purchasers - Whether agreement between developer and contractor in creating charge in favour of contractor unlawful, illegal and void - Whether there was contravention of reg. 11 of Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989

LAND LAW: Housing developers - Sale and purchase agreement - Deed of novation - Whether novatee stepped into shoes of original purchaser - Whether novatee entitled to rights, title and interest pursuant to sale and purchase agreement - Whether Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1996 applicable to purchaser as being novatee of deed of novation - Whether developer could subject land to any encumbrances without prior consent of purchasers - Whether agreement between developer and contractor in creating charge in favour of contractor unlawful, illegal and void - Whether there was contravention of reg. 11 of Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989

 

MARY LIM JCA
HAS ZANAH MEHAT JCA
VAZEER ALAM MYDIN MEERA JCA

  • For the appellant - Kam Pei Yee & Angie Yoo; M/s David Lai & Tan
  • For the 2nd respondent - Siew Yew Ming & Chan Mun Fei; M/s Raja Eleena Siew Ang & Assocs

The doctrine of purposive construction of contract entails that, in the construction of a contractual term, there must be ascribed to the words a meaning that would make good commercial or business sense. The duty of the court is to construe the words used in the contract to give business efficacy to the bargain between the parties, rather than to strike down the words as bearing no meaning or an obtuse literal meaning. Every word used in the contract must be presumed to be used by the parties intentionally and for a purpose and the words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning. If the terms of the words used can be given a meaning that would accord with the purpose for which the term is contained in the contract, then a purposive construction must be made to give effect to it.
Parkwell Departmental Store Sdn Bhd v. ICSD Ventures Sdn Bhd [2020] 9 CLJ 107 [CA]

CONTRACT: Agreement - Tenancy agreement - Breach - Allegation of - Mutual termination of tenancy agreement between landlord and tenant - Claim by landlord for unpaid rental, costs of repairs and late payment interests - Whether there was unpaid rental due to landlord - Whether there was late delivery of vacant possession - Whether landlord entitled to charge late payment interests - Whether landlord entitled to cost for repair works - Whether landlord could forfeit tenancy deposits paid by tenant

 

 

MARY LIM JCA
ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF JCA
VAZEER ALAM MYDIN MEERA JCA

  • For the appellant - M/s Gabriel Ho & Co
  • For the respondent - M/s William Liaw Chan & Co

The company, having utilised the loan and publicly acknowledged defaulting on the repayment of the loan, and further having announced that the lenders had the right to transfer the pledged shares in the event the company was unable to make repayment, had then sought to renege on the same by filing ex-parte applications for injunctive reliefs based only on the presumption under the Moneylenders Act 1951 that the lenders were carrying on the business of moneylending because interests were charged to their advances. Clearly, the company had not come to court with clean hands and the applications for the injunctive reliefs were not made in good faith nor bona fide. The balance of convenience favoured the lenders as, inter alia, the transfer of the pledged shares was purely a recovery action to recoup the sum that was disbursed to the company.
Scomi Group Bhd v. Gelombang Global Sdn Bhd & Anor And Another Application [2020] 9 CLJ 122 [HC]

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Injunction - Application for - Ex parte application for injunction to restrain disposal and transfer of pledged shares in any manner pursuant to stakeholder agreement - Company requested for lenders to provide financial assistance and undertook corporate restructuring exercise - Whether lenders entitled to exercise their respective rights against pledged shares in the event company defaulted in repayment of loan - Whether loan agreements illegal, invalid and unenforceable - Whether lenders in business of moneylending - Whether there were bona fide issues to be tried - Whether party came to court with clean hands - Whether application for injunctive reliefs made in good faith - Whether company suffered loss or hardship - Balance of convenience - Whether justice of case favoured dismissal of injunctive reliefs - Moneylenders Act 1951, s. 10OA

 

 

ONG CHEE KWAN JC

(Originating Summons No: WA-22NCC-74-02-2020)

  • For the plaintiff - Ben Chan & Alane Neo; M/s Lim Soh & Goonting
  • For the 1st defendant - Edward Kuruvilla, Tiew Kai Xiang (PDK) & Lim Ziyi (PDK); M/s Christopher & Lee Ong
  • For the 2nd defendant - FJ Cheah; M/s Shook Lin & Bok

(Originating Summons No: WA-22NCC-75-02-2020)

  • For the plaintiff - Ben Chan & Alane Neo; M/s Lim Soh & Goonting
  • For the 1st defendant - Yap Boon Hau, Adrian Koh & Phoebe Ng; M/s Mah-Kamariyah & Philip Koh
  • For the 2nd defendant - FJ Cheah; M/s Shook Lin & Bok

ARTICLES

LNS Article(s)

  1. SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE WORKPLACE: 3 CIVIL PROTECTIONS FOR VICTIMS [Read excerpt]
    by Cynthia Lee Mei Fei* Amanda Pang** [2020] 1 LNS(A) cii

  2. [2020] 1 LNS(A) cii
    logo
    MALAYSIA

    SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT THE WORKPLACE: 3 CIVIL PROTECTIONS FOR VICTIMS

    by
    Cynthia Lee Mei Fei*
    Amanda Pang**

    The long anticipated Sexual Harassment Bill which is expected to be tabled in Parliament this year has met with several delays. The Bill was intended to provide a more effective mechanism for victims of sexual harassment to lodge complaints. In the meantime, victims of sexual harassment may be relieved to know that filing a police report is not the only option available. Below are 3 current protections offered by the law to victims of sexual harassment:

    1. The Employment Act imposes employers with a statutory obligation to inquire into sexual harassment complaints at the workplace

    Under Section 81B of the Employment Act 1955 (Revised 1981) ("EA"), employers are required to inquire into a sexual harassment complaint raised in the workplace. An employer who refuses to inquire into a complaint must have reasons for his refusal and he must inform the complainant of his refusal in writing.

    . . .

    *Cynthia Lee Mei Fei completed her studies in law at Cardiff University with an LLB Law (Hons) and the Bar Professional Training Certificate (BPTC). She is a dispute resolution lawyer at Messrs Chai & Co. and a member of the KL Bar Women's Rights Committee.

    **Amanda Pang Tsu Teng completed her studies in law at Cardiff University with an LLB Law (Hons), LLM (International Commercial Law) and the Bar Professional Training Certificate (BPTC). She is a dispute resolution lawyer and occasionally writes in her legal blog at latenightlaws.com.


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
  3. ANALYSIS ON THE ROLE OF PARTY AUTONOMY IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION [Read excerpt]
    by Nur Syakirah Binti Mohd Adnan* [2020] 1 LNS(A) ciii

  4. [2020] 1 LNS(A) ciii
    logo
    MALAYSIA

    ANALYSIS ON THE ROLE OF PARTY AUTONOMY IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION

    by
    Nur Syakirah Binti Mohd Adnan*

    ABSTRACT

    The recent economic growth of international trade and commerce has drawn attention to the creation and amendment of various international commercial arbitration laws, principles, and regulations. Like the "principle of party autonomy", many well-recognized doctrines have emerged so far. This principle broadens the freedom of the parties to essentially determine laws, arbitrators and places of arbitration. However, certain restrictive principles have been developed which limit its application. This paper mainly endeavours to provide a critical evaluation of such influences and boundaries of the party autonomy focusing on the relevant laws.

    INTRODUCTION

    International commercial arbitration is the most preferred alternative dispute settlement in recent years. One of the reasons behind this popularity is flexibility of the arbitral process. Basically, the principle which makes the arbitral process flexible is party autonomy.

    . . .

    *G1915632 IIUM, LLM in International Law, adnansyakira@yahoo.com.


    Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
  5. A NOT-SO ARBITRARY SOLUTION: ADR IN POST COVID-19 LANDSCAPE* [Read excerpt]
    by Debra Parker** Claire Naidu** [2020] 1 LNS(A) ci

  6. [2020] 1 LNS(A) ci
    logo
    AUSTRALIA

    A NOT-SO ARBITRARY SOLUTION: ADR IN POST COVID-19 LANDSCAPE*

    by
    Debra Parker**
    Claire Naidu**

    Debra Parker and Claire Naidu from the Law Society's ADR Committee discuss the new opportunities for alternative forms of dispute resolution arising from the disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The arrival of COVID-19 brought with it a wave of uncertainty that rippled across almost every industry.

    In the area of law, it meant a surge of adjournments and delayed court proceedings. It also led to a number of court occasions and other tribunal or dispute resolution meetings conventionally held face to face being performed virtually, either by video link or by telephone.

    The disruptions, although a big shift for practitioners, introduced new and exciting opportunities for certain forms of law practice to develop, adapt, and modernise to keep up with the new circumstances. Australian Courts have placed a great emphasis on embracing new technology to meet the needs of parties in a time of inaccessibility and geographical isolation.[1]

    . . .

    * Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos Winter 2020, Issue 256.

    ** Debra Parker is an Equity Partner at Watts McCray Lawyers in Canberra and an accredited specialist in Family Law and Dispute Resolution with the Law Society of NSW. Debra is a Nationally Accredited Mediator and Arbitrator and member of the Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Mediators, as well as an Accredited Collaborative Law Practitioner.
    Claire Naidu is a Partner and Principal Mediator at Claire Naidu & Co. She is an Accredited Family Law Specialist, a Relationship Specialist and a Nationally Accredited Mediator and Arbitrator, as well as a Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner and Conflict Coach.

    The authors acknowledge the assistance of Alexandra Elgue in preparing this article.


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

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealing
ACT 827 Currency Act 2020 Not Yet In Force -
ACT 826 Food Donors Protection Act 2020 31 March 2020 [PU(B) 166/2020] -
ACT 825 Anti-Fake News (Repeal) Act 2020 31 January 2020 -
ACT 824 Malaysian Health Promotion Board (Dissolution) Act 2019 1 April 2020 [PU(B) 119/2020] -
ACT 823 Finance Act 2019 Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s 3, Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s 22, Stamp Act 1949 [Act 378] see s 27, Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 29, Sales Tax Act 2018 [Act 806] see s 35, Finance Act 2010 [Act 702] see s 37 and the Finance Act 2018 [Act 812] see s 39 -

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1617 Franchise (Amendment) Act 2020 Not Yet In Force ACT 590
ACT A1616 Central Bank of Malaysia (Amendment) Act 2020 Not Yet In Force ACT 701
ACT A1615 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2020 Not Yet In Force ACT 177
ACT A1614 Labuan Business Activity Tax (Amendment) Act 2020 10 February 2020 - para 2(a) and s 13 and 15; Year of assessment 2020 and subsequent years of assessment - para 2(b) and s 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14; 1 January 2019 - s 8 ACT 445
ACT A1613 Carriage of Goods by Sea (Amendment) Act 2020 Not Yet In Force ACT 527

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(A) 269/2020 Income Tax (Exemption) (No. 9) 2002 (Amendment) Order 2020 8 September 2020 Year of assessment 2018 and shall continue to be in operation until the year of assessment 2020 PU(A) 57/2002
PU(A) 267/2020 Income Tax (Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information) (Amendment) Rules 2020 4 September 2020 5 September 2020 PU(A) 355/2016
PU(A) 266/2020 Labuan Business Activity Tax (Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 4 September 2020 5 September 2020 PU(A) 20/2018
PU(A) 265/2020 Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) (Remission of Tax and Stamp Duty) (No. 4) Order 2020 3 September 2020 4 September 2020 ACT 96
PU(A) 264/2020 Printing of Qur'anic Texts (Amendment) Regulations 2020 3 September 2020 4 September 2020 PU(A) 488/1986

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(B) 436/2020 Notice Regarding The Certification and Inspection of The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter of The Year 2020 - Sarawak 26 August 2020 27 August 2020 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 435/2020 Notice Regarding The Certification and Inspection of The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter of The Year 2020 - Sabah 26 August 2020 27 August 2020 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 434/2020 Notice Regarding The Certification and Inspection of The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter of The Year 2020 - Federal Territory of Labuan 26 August 2020 27 August 2020 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 433/2020 Notice Regarding The Certification and Inspection of The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter of The Year 2020 - Johore 26 August 2020 27 August 2020 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 432/2020 Notice Regarding The Certification and Inspection of The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter of The Year 2020 - Malacca 26 August 2020 27 August 2020 PU(A) 293/2002

Legislation Alert

Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended
PU(A) 57/2002 Income Tax (Exemption) (No. 9) Order 2002 PU(A) 269/2020 Year of assessment 2018 and shall continue to be in operation until the year of assessment 2020 Paragraph 4
PU(A) 355/2016 Income Tax (Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information) Rules 2016 PU(A) 267/2020 5 September 2020 Schedule 2
PU(A) 20/2018 Labuan Business Activity Tax (Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information) Regulations 2018 PU(A) 266/2020 5 September 2020 First Schedule
PU(A) 488/1986 Printing of Qur'anic Texts Regulations 1986 PU(A) 264/2020 4 September 2020 Regulations 3 and 4
ACT 366 Poisons Act 1952 (Revised 1989) PU(A) 257/2020 2 September 2020 First Schedule & Appendix

Revoked

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from
PU(A) 97/2020 Motor Vehicles (Exemption) Rules 2020 PU(A) 251/2020 1 September 2020
PU(A) 248/1998 Rubber Industry (Replanting) Fund (Cess on Rubber Sold to Manufacturers) Order 1998 PU(A) 232/2020 1 October 2020 - Peninsular Malaysia only
PU(B) 663/2018 Appointment of Member of the Advisory Board PU(B) 388/2020 10 August 2020 until 9 August 2022
PU(B) 140/2020 Appointment and Revocation of Appointment of Deputy Director General of the Board PU(B) 373/2020 1 June 2020
PU(A) 211/2020 Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases (Medical Attendance and Maintenance of Person Removed to Quarantine Station) Regulations 2020 PU(A) 233/2020 24 July 2020