|
Introduction: To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CASE(S) OF THE WEEK |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MANGALESWARY PONNAMPALAM v. GIRITHARAN E RAJARATNAM [2015] 6 CLJ 561 FAMILY LAW: Orders for protection - Domestic violence - Interim protection order ('IPO') - Setting aside - Application for - Magistrate's decision affirmed by High Court - Appeal against - Whether IPO could still be in force when parties were divorced and living separately - Whether IPO was temporary order - Whether application to set aside filed out of time - Whether medical report produced by appellant - Whether police investigation completed - Whether appellant bears burden to satisfy court that IPO should be allowed to remain - Whether Magistrate's decision in setting aside IPO valid - Whether respondent prejudiced - Domestic Violence Act 1994, ss. 4(1), 4(4) & 12B
DATUK HUSAM MUSA v. UTUSAN MELAYU (M) BHD & ORS [2015] 6 CLJ 760 TORT: Defamation - Libel - Libellous article published in newspaper - Plaintiff claimed impugned articles imputed certain characteristics or attributes to him - Whether words complained of, in their natural and ordinary meaning, capable of bearing imputations ascribed to them by plaintiff - Whether imputations tendered to lower plaintiff in estimation of right thinking members of society - Whether words in impugned report read in its entirety defamatory of plaintiff - Whether imputations pleaded by plaintiff strained, forced or utterly unreasonable interpretation of words in impugned report PP v. MOHAMED SAIFUL NIZAM MOHAMED [2015] 1 SMC 311 CRIMINAL LAW:Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 12(2) - Possession of 0.02 grams of methamphetamine - Whether accused had knowledge about drugs - Whether there was doubt as to drugs seized from accused - Whether there was gap in prosecution's case - Whether defence an afterthought To view a sample of the Sessions and Magistrates' Cases journal, click here. For product enquiries, contact priority@cljlaw.com. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LATEST CASES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Legal Network Series
CLJ 2015 Volume 6 (Part 5) COURT COURT OF APPEAL Mangaleswary Ponnampalam v. Giritharan E Rajaratnam PP v. Zolzaya Natsagroj HIGH COURT Agrokor Sdn Bhd v. Perkayuan TM (M) Sdn Bhd; Thng Bay Sng & Ors, Partners Of Legal Firm Azam Malek & Soh (Third Parties) Gerard Jude Timothy Pereira v. Kasi KL Palaniappan Irene Pang Mei Fang v. PP Murray & Roberts Australia Pty Ltd v. Earth Support Company (Sea) Sdn Bhd Sukridta Chalia & Yang Lain lwn. Lee Ghee Boon & Satu Lagi SUBJECT INDEX ARBITRATION Award - Foreign award - Application to recognise foreign award as binding and enforcement of award as judgment against defendant - Originating summons ('OS') - Whether OS complied with procedural requirements - Whether intitulement in OS failed to mention which rule was being relied on by plaintiff - Whether such failure a mere irregularity - Rules of Court 2012, O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1(1), (2), O. 7 r. 2(1A), O. 69 Enforcement - Foreign award - Breach of supply agreement - Plaintiff referred claim for rectification cost to Australian Arbitration - Awards granted from Australian Arbitrator - Originating summons ('OS') filed for recognition and enforcement of foreign award as judgment against defendant - Whether plaintiff required to register and enforce Australian Arbitral award in Australia before filing OS - Whether court had jurisdiction to recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards - Whether there was any grounds of refusal - Arbitration Act 2005, ss. 38 & 39 CIVIL PROCEDURE Originating summons - Striking out - Ex parte application - Whether court could direct ex parte application to be heard inter partes Third party proceedings - Indemnity - Contribution from third party - Negligence - Duty of care by solicitors - Whether indemnity or contribution could be claimed in absence of breach of duty of care CONTRACT Breach - Remedies - Specific performance - Sale of land - Repudiatory breach of contract - Unlawful termination of agreement by vendor - Purchaser refused to accept vendor's repudiation of agreement - Right of innocent party - Whether purchaser entitled to seek for specific performance against vendor Construction of terms of contract - Contract for sale of land - Word 'any reason whatsoever' - Intention of parties - Fulfilment of obligation - Whether includes any reason caused or contributed by parties to an agreement - Whether includes any reason within obligation and power of parties to eliminate - Whether limited to supervening neutral reason beyond reach of parties to deal with Loan - Friendly loan - Allegation of - Claim for repayment - Loans not documented in writing - Letters demanding repayment sent to defendant - Whether defendant's failure to reply tantamounted to admission that sums were owed to plaintiff - Whether settlement agreement acknowledged existence of outstanding loan - Whether payments intended by parties to be loan from plaintiff to defendant - Whether claim allowed Time - Completion date - Performance of contractual obligation within stipulated period in agreement - Whether time was of the essence - Act of prevention by one party to a contract - Blatant disregard of vendor to remove caveat - Delay in obtaining consent to transfer by vendor - Reasonable time for completion - Whether completion period as prescribed in agreement still applicable - Whether time was set at large - Whether parties could complete agreement beyond agreed completion date CRIMINAL LAW Dangerous Drugs Act 1950 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in 278.6g of heroin and 85.0g monoacetylmorphines - Drugs found hidden in separate bags - Whether trial judge correctly invoked presumption of trafficking based on weight of drugs - Whether accused had knowledge of drugs - Defence of ignorance - Whether presumption of trafficking rebutted - Whether trial judge erred in acquitting and discharging accused Immigration Act 1959/63 - Section 55B(1) - Whether accused employed illegal immigrants without valid work permit - Whether premise where business operated belonged to accused - Whether accused operated business at premise - Whether prima facie case established CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Appeal - Appeal by prosecution - Trafficking in 278.6g of heroin and 85.0g monoacetylmorphines - Drugs found hidden in separate bags - Whether trial judge correctly invoked presumption of trafficking based on weight of drugs - Whether accused had knowledge of drugs - Defence of ignorance - Whether presumption of trafficking rebutted - Whether trial judge erred in acquitting and discharging accused EVIDENCE Admissibility - Deposition - Admissibility of deposition - Whether court must accept dispositions as prima facie evidence - Prerequisites - Whether disposition was exception to hearsay rule - Immigration Act 1959/63, s. 40A(1) Presumptions - Adverse inference - Failure to call witness - Whether adverse inference ought to be invoked against accused - Whether burden on accused was only to raise reasonable doubt on prosecution's case - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g) Statement - Cautioned statement - Inconsistency between cautioned statement and oral testimony - Whether inadequately considered by trial judge - Whether trial judge erred in accepting accused oral testimony FAMILY LAW Orders for protection - Domestic violence - Interim protection order ('IPO') - Setting aside - Application for - Magistrate's decision affirmed by High Court - Appeal against - Whether IPO could still be in force when parties were divorced and living separately - Whether IPO was temporary order - Whether application to set aside filed out of time - Whether medical report produced by appellant - Whether police investigation completed - Whether appellant bears burden to satisfy court that IPO should be allowed to remain - Whether Magistrate's decision in setting aside IPO valid - Whether respondent prejudiced - Domestic Violence Act 1994, ss. 4(1), 4(4) & 12B TORT Damages - Exemplary damages - Unjust enrichment - Vendor holding on and benefited from unauthorised usage of deposit money - Repudiatory breach of contract by vendor - Whether purchaser entitled to exemplary damages as result of unjust enrichment by vendor from usage of deposit money INDEKS PERKARA GANTI RUGI Kuantum - Rayuan - Kemalangan jalanraya - Versi yang berbeza antara pihak-pihak yang terlibat - Versi yang lebih kredibel - Liabiliti 50%-50% - Sama ada hakim Mahkamah Sesyen khilaf dalam award - Rayuan terhadap ganti rugi am kehilangan peluang untuk berkahwin dan kos kaki palsu TORT Ganti rugi - Taksiran - Kemalangan jalanraya - Versi yang berbeza antara pihak-pihak yang terlibat - Versi yang lebih kredibel - Liabiliti 50%-50% - Sama ada hakim Mahkamah Sesyen khilaf dalam award ganti rugi am dan khas CLJ 2015 Volume 6 (Part 6) COURT COURT OF APPEAL Fujasa Property Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Idaman Unggul Bhd & Anor K Siladass v. CIMB Bank Bhd Pendaftar Hakmilik, Pejabat Pendaftaran Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur & Anor v. Poh Yang Hong Tenaga Nasional Bhd v. Dunia Raya Enterprise Sdn Bhd HIGH COURT Datuk Husam Musa v. Utusan Melayu (M) Bhd & Ors Mayaria Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd Perfect Nation Development Sdn Bhd lwn. Soria Ibrahim & Satu Lagi Stadco Sdn Bhd v. Cherating Development Sdn Bhd & Anor SUBJECT INDEX CIVIL PROCEDURE Third party proceedings - Contribution from third party - Opening of fraudulent accounts - Misappropriation of monies by unknown persons - Appellant as partner of legal firm suffered losses due to bank's negligence - Numerous suits filed and judgments obtained against firm for breach of fiduciary duty - Whether firm through its partners commenced third party proceedings against bank - Whether payment to settle plaintiff's claim made without admission of liability - Whether appellant entitled to seek contribution from bank as joint tortfeasor - Whether liability under third party proceedings could only arise where there was specific finding of liability between plaintiff and appellant - Whether judgment against bank allowed - Civil Law Act 1956, s. 10(1)(c) COMPANY LAW Shares - Purchase of its own shares by company - Whether settlement and assignment agreement intended for company's own resources to be used to finance purchase of own shares - Whether contravened financial assistance prohibition - Whether had effect of dissipating company's assets - Companies Act 1965, ss. 67(1) & (6) CONTRACT Illegality - Agreement - Settlement and assignment agreement - Agreement in contravention of s. 67(1) of Companies Act 1965 - Intention of Legislature - Whether to be construed narrowly - Whether s. 67(6) of Companies Act 1965 allows for recovery under illegal contract - Whether operation of s. 24 of Contracts Act 1950 excluded Sale and purchase of property - Failure to complete - Plaintiff claimed against second defendant pursuant to sale purchase agreements entered into with first defendant for completed properties - Whether plaintiff had made full payment for purchase of said properties - Whether said agreements were sham agreements - Whether second defendant bound by terms of said agreements - Whether common law rule in contract that a person may not take benefit of contract without being bound by its burdens applied to second defendant - Whether there was any conspiracy between first and second defendants to defraud plaintiff - Whether properties held on trust by second defendant for benefit of plaintiff - Evidence Act 1950, s. 92(b) - Specific Relief Act 1950, ss. 23(a), (c), 26(b) LAND LAW Sale of land - Search - Private and public searches on land - Inaccuracy of land registry - Private search revealed one registered owner - Public search revealed two different titles on one land - Claim for damages against Land Registrar - Tort of negligence - Statutory duties of Land Registrar to keep and maintain land registry - Whether breached - National Land Code, ss. 22, 384 & 385 STATUTORY INTERPRETATION Construction of statutes - Purposive approach - Interpretation of s. 38(1) of Electricity Supply Act 1990 - Whether court can examine purpose and intent of statutory provision in its interpretation TORT Damages - Joint tortfeasors - Third party proceedings - Claim against third party bank as another or joint tortfeasor - Whether third party bank found to be negligent - Whether accountable in damages for losses suffered - Civil Law Act 1956, s. 10(1)(c) Defamation - Libel - Libellous article published in newspaper - Plaintiff claimed impugned articles imputed certain characteristics or attributes to him - Whether words complained of, in their natural and ordinary meaning, capable of bearing imputations ascribed to them by plaintiff - Whether imputations tendered to lower plaintiff in estimation of right thinking members of society - Whether words in impugned report read in its entirety defamatory of plaintiff - Whether imputations pleaded by plaintiff strained, forced or utterly unreasonable interpretation of words in impugned report Negligence - Statutory duty - Statutory duty of Land Registrar - Sale of land - Private and public searches on land - Inaccuracy of land registry - Private searches revealed one registered owner - Public search revealed two different titles on one land - Claim for damages against Land Registrar - Statutory duties of Land Registrar to keep and maintain land registry - Whether breached - National Land Code, ss. 22, 384 & 385 UTILITIES Electricity - Charges for electricity - Claim for losses resulting from meter-tampering - Tampered meter rectified by Tenaga Nasional Bhd ('TNB') - Whether TNB can disconnect electricity supply upon user's failure to pay loss of revenue caused by tampering - Whether TNB's statutory right of disconnection ceases upon rectification of tampered meter - Electricity Supply Act 1990, ss. 37, 38(1) Electricity - Consumption and usage - Claim for loss of revenue - Tampered meter - Whether meter was in custody of plaintiff - Whether appellant had to prove meters were tampered by respondent - Whether respondent liable to pay for loss of revenue according to s. 38(3) Electricity Supply Act 1990 (ESA 1990) - Whether certified written statement under s. 38(4) ESA 1990 complied with mandatory requirements - Whether appellant could rely on certified written statement to initiate civil action - Whether appellant independently proved liability as well as quantum INDEKS PERKARA PROSEDUR SIVIL Lanjutan masa - Permohonan kebenaran - Perjanjian jual beli perumahan - Permohonan lanjutan masa difailkan bersama-sama dengan permohonan semakan kehakiman terhadap award Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah - Cara pemulaan prosiding - Sama ada mematuhi prosedur yang ditetapkan undang-undang - Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 5 & A. 53 Rayuan - Pertindihan - Perjanjian jual beli perumahan - Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah mengawardkan kos pembaikan kecacatan kepada responden - Permohonan kebenaran bagi semakan kehakiman terhadap award - Notis bantahan awal terhadap permohonan semakan kehakiman pemohon dibenarkan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi - Rayuan terhadap keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi di Mahkamah Rayuan - Pemfailan permohonan semakan kehakiman terhadap Award sekali lagi di Mahkamah Tinggi - Sama ada terdapat pertindihan |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ARTICLES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LNS Article(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert Updated
Revoked
|
