|
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 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PALM SPRING JOINT MANAGEMENT BODY & ANOR v. LAND LAW: Strata title - Management corporation - Maintenance and management of building - Whether joint management body ('JMB') could co-exist with management corporation ('MC') - Whether JMB intended to be interim body - Establishment of JMB after MC established by opening of book of strata register - Whether null and void - Whether JMB lawfully constituted - Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007, s. 4(1) - Strata Titles Act 1985, s. 15
KOH HENG JIN HOLDINGS SDN BHD v. PHUAH BENG CHOOI & ANOR [2016] 3 CLJ 837 LAND LAW: Conveyancing - Transfer of property - Co-ownership - Application by majority share owners to compel co-owners to sell share in property - Absence of evidence that conditions for termination of co-proprietorship were satisfied - Whether court could exercise power to terminate co-proprietorship - Whether issue fell within ambit of 'in any cause or matter relating to land' under para. 3 of Schedule (Additional Powers of the High Court) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - National Land Code, ss. 145 & 417 SUCCESSION: Administration - Action for possession of land - Action by co-owner of undivided share of property against administrators of estate - Whether question pertaining to exercise of administrators' duties relevant - Whether co-owner beneficiary of estate - Whether had vested interest - Whether entitled to interfere in affairs of administrator and beneficiaries - Probate and Administration Act 1959, ss. 60 & 68 PP lwn. MOHD SHAH IBRAHIM [2016] 1 SMC 96 UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 12(2) - Memiliki dadah berbahaya - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai milikan dan kawalan terhadap dadah yang dijumpai - Sama ada tertuduh menunjukkan tempat di mana dadah terletak - Sama ada orang lain mempunyai akses ke dalam rumah di mana dadah dijumpai - Identiti dan tempat dadah dijumpai - Sama ada keterangan saksi pendakwaan bercanggah - Milikan eksklusif - Sama ada dibuktikan - Sama ada siasatan menyeluruh dilakukan oleh pegawai penyiasat - Sama ada tertuduh didapati bersalah - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 27 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 2016 Volume 3 (Part 5) FEDERAL COURT Palm Spring Joint Management Body & Anor v. Muafakat Kekal Sdn Bhd & Anor COURT OF APPEAL Cubic Electronic Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) v. MKC Corporate & Business Advisory Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal JCT Limited v. Muniandy Nadasan & Ors And Another Appeal Johnbosco Chinedu Augustine v. PP Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Kerja Raya v. Strongkota Development Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal Mashkon Hj Samuri v. Orang Kampung Holdings (M) Sdn Bhd Petroliam Nasional Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Kota Tinggi & Ors PP v. Muhammad Saifullah Awang Yeoh Eng Kong v. Choo Kok Yeow & Anor HIGH COURT Bukit Baru Villas Sdn Bhd v. Malaysia Building Society Bhd PP lwn. Chang Siew Fah PP v. Ng Kwan Hua SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review - Decision of Industrial Court ('IC') - IC found dismissal of employee without just and valid excuse - Whether IC considered circumstances of case in totality - Whether evidence of witnesses subjected to detailed analysis - Whether IC had jurisdiction to depart from punishment meted out by employer CIVIL PROCEDURE Injunction - Injunction to restrain presentation of winding up petition - Principles for granting of Fortuna injunction - Whether presentation of petition would cause irreparable damage - Whether debt disputed - Whether injunction ought to be granted - Companies Act 1965, s. 218 Locus standi - Land acquisition - Applicant objected against award by Land Administrator and referred matter to High Court for determination - Whether applicant had locus standi to file application - Whether applicant fell under category of persons specified under s. 37(1) of Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Whether applicant 'person interested' - Whether applicant undertook work of public utility - Whether purpose of acquisition fell within definition of public utility - Land Acquisition Act 1960, Sch. 2, Forms E & N, ss. 8, 11, 12, 37 & 55 Pleadings - Findings on matters not pleaded - Failure to plead undue preference under s. 293 of Companies Act 1965 read together with s. 53 of Bankruptcy Act 1967 - Reliance on omnibus prayer that 'undue influence' could fall into paragraphs in pleadings - Whether omnibus prayer is pleading clause - Whether failure to specifically plead undue preference detrimental - Whether orders of trial judge sustainable Pleadings - Statement of claim - Cause of action - Assumption of responsibility - Failure to plead - Whether fatal to claim COMPANY LAW Fraudulent trading - Elements of offence - Whether business conducted in manner so as to defraud creditors - Whether element of dishonesty proven - Whether creditors deceived and deprived of funds meant to service their loans - Companies Act 1965, s. 304 CONTRACT Agreement - Tenancy agreement - Breach - Landlord entered tenancy agreement with third party while master tenancy agreement with first party still subsisting - Third party sub-let subject property to fourth party - Whether there was breach of contract by landlord - Whether parties conspired to deprive first party of its rights - Whether vacant possession had been delivered - Allegation that tenancy agreement had been terminated because first party failed to pay rent - Whether tenancy agreement valid - Whether enforceable Damages - Specific performance - Sale and purchase agreement - Wrongful termination - Claim for damages - Defendants awarded general damages in another suit pertaining to same subject matter - Whether defendants entitled to recover general damages in present suit - Whether damages claimed in both suits arose from same cause of action - Whether 'double' damages awarded CRIMINAL LAW Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Absence of written judgment - Whether rights under art. 5 of Federal Constitution compromised - Whether miscarriage of justice had been committed in sentencing accused - Whether conviction safe - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 60 Murder - Defence - Accused suffered from psychotic depression - Whether accused mentally fit to stand trial - Whether prima facie case established - Whether trial could proceed - Whether there could be fair trial - Penal Code, ss. 300 & 302 - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 344(3) Offences - Grievous hurt - Accused slit victim's throat and stabbed her chest - Whether victim suffered grievous injury - Whether victim's life endangered - Accused suffered from psychotic depression - Whether accused mentally fit to stand trial - Whether prima facie case established - Whether trial could proceed - Whether there could be fair trial - Penal Code, ss. 320(h) & 326 - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 344(3) Penal Code - Section 304(a) - Culpable homicide - Stabbing deceased in chest - Accused sentenced to eight years imprisonment - Conviction and sentence - Appeal against - Appeal by prosecution - Whether sentence imposed adequate - Whether reflects gravity of offence - Whether accused had intention to cause death of deceased - Claim of minimal involvement in crime - Whether accused entitled to lenient sentence - Public interest - Mitigating factors - Severity of offence committed - Whether sentence imposed ought to be enhanced CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Appeal - Sentence, against - Appeal by prosecution - Penal Code, s. 304(a) - Culpable homicide - Stabbing deceased in chest - Accused sentenced to eight years imprisonment - Whether sentence imposed adequate - Whether reflects gravity of offence - Whether accused had intention to cause death of deceased - Claim of minimal involvement in crime - Whether accused entitled to lenient sentence - Public interest - Mitigating factors - Severity of offence committed - Whether sentence imposed ought to be enhanced Judgment - Grounds of - Absence of written judgment - Whether rights under art. 5 of Federal Constitution compromised - Whether miscarriage of justice had been committed in sentencing accused - Whether conviction safe - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 60 EVIDENCE Dying declaration - Admissibility - Accused charged for murder and voluntarily causing grievous hurt - Dying declaration of deceased pointed to accused as perpetrator - Whether dying declaration must be corroborated - Whether admissible as evidence - Whether prima facie case successfully established Standard of proof - Fraudulent trading - Trial judge adopted criminal standard of proof in cases of fraudulent trading under s. 304 of Companies Act 1965 - Whether ought to be on standard of balance of probabilities - Whether caused injustice - Whether trial judge erred LABOUR LAW Employment - Dismissal - Employee sanctioned by way of warning letter - Whether subsequent dismissal based on same misconduct amounted to being penalised twice - Whether allowed by law - Whether proven misconduct by employee deserved punishment of dismissal - Whether dismissal with just and valid excuse LAND LAW Acquisition of land - Compensation - Acquisition of land for major road project - Delay in acquiring land - Claim for losses - Duty of care - Whether land should have been acquired without delay - Assumption of responsibility - Whether pleaded - Whether trial judge erred in deciding on unpleaded issues Acquisition of land - Objection against award - Locus standi - Applicant objected against award by Land Administrator and referred matter to High Court for determination - Whether applicant had locus standi to file application - Whether applicant fell under category of persons specified under s. 37(1) of Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Whether applicant 'person interested' - Whether applicant undertook work of public utility - Whether purpose of acquisition fell within definition of public utility - Land Acquisition Act 1960, Sch. 2, Forms E & N, ss. 8, 11, 12, 37 & 55 Strata title - Management corporation - Maintenance and management of building - Whether joint management body ('JMB') could co-exist with management corporation ('MC') - Whether JMB intended to be interim body - Establishment of JMB after MC established by opening of book of strata register - Whether null and void - Whether JMB lawfully constituted - Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007, s. 4(1) - Strata Titles Act 1985, s. 15 TORT Conspiracy - Lawful means conspiracy - Landlord entered tenancy agreement with third party while master tenancy agreement with first party still subsisting - Third party sub-let subject property to fourth party - Whether landlord and other parties conspired to deprive first party of its rights - Whether there was combination or agreement between landlord and other parties to injure first party - Whether certain acts were carried out pursuant to combination or agreement - Whether first party suffered loss and damages due to alleged conspiracy by landlord and other parties INDEKS PERKARA PROSEDUR JENAYAH Rayuan - Lucut hak - Tafsiran s. 26(1) Akta Kawalan Bekalan 1961 - Sama ada Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen ('HMS') terkhilaf dari segi undang-undang dan fakta apabila tidak mengambil kira pendekatan bertujuan dalam mentafsir s. 26(1) - Sama ada HMS terkhilaf apabila tidak melucut hak ekshibit-ekshibit atas alasan ia bukan milik tertuduh CLJ 2016 Volume 3 (Part 6) COURT OF APPEAL Koh Heng Jin Holdings Sdn Bhd v. Phuah Beng Chooi & Anor Pendaftar Hakmilik, Pejabat Tanah Dan Galian Negeri Selangor v. Bank Pertanian Malaysia Bhd PP lwn. Mohd Haniff Mosbah & Satu Lagi Sepideh Golrokhfar Abdollah v. PP HIGH COURT Asuria Ahmad lwn. PP Gakyah Buyong lwn. PP Hotel Sentral (JB) Sdn Bhd v. Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Negeri Johor, Malaysia & Ors Iszuree Ibrahim v. Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang & Ors And Another Case Master Pyrodor Sdn Bhd v. Tai Thong Flower Nursery Sdn Bhd Re Benny Ong Swee Siang; Ex p United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Exercise of administrative powers - Decision - Decision of State Authority to revoke applicant's appointment as council member - Whether appointment of council member at pleasure of State Authority - Whether applicant could be removed as council member at sole discretion of State Authority - Whether applicant should be accorded right to be heard - Whether power to appoint included power to remove or dismiss - Whether applicant's removal from local council's permanent committees and ad hoc meetings tainted with procedural impropriety - Local Government Act 1976, ss. 10(1) and 10(4) BANKRUPTCY Discharge - Discharge of bankrupt - Appeal against - Whether Director General of Insolvency ('DGI') had absolute discretion to issue certificate of discharge - Whether DGI utilised all reasonable endeavours to locate bankrupt - Whether bankrupt's estate had been administered - Whether certificate of discharge ought to be issued - Bankruptcy Act 1967, ss. 33A and 33B CIVIL PROCEDURE Judicial precedent - Stare decisis - Remission of case from Court of Appeal to High Court - Specific directions given by Court of Appeal - Whether to be followed as part of doctrine of binding precedent - Whether departure by High Court would tantamount to setting aside decision of Court of Appeal Locus standi - Sale of land - Absence of approval from Estate Land Board for transfer of land - Whether purchaser obtained title illegally - Whether title defeasible - Whether lacked locus standi to commence action - National Land Code, ss. 214A & 340 Parties - Actions by and against State Authority - National Land Code, s. 16 - State Authority's decision to revoke road reserve and alienate it to fourth respondent - Application for judicial review to quash decision - Whether State Authority made a party to application - Whether action brought against State Director in the name of his office - Whether application to quash decision allowed CRIMINAL LAW Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in dangerous drugs - Presumption of knowledge under s. 37(d) - Whether rebutted - Whether reasonable doubt raised on prosecution case - Whether conviction safe CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Appeal - Trial judge's findings - Trafficking in dangerous drugs - Defence of accused that third person gave food packages containing dangerous drugs - Whether adequate weight given to defence - Whether third person fictitious character - Whether third person proven to be actual owner of dangerous drugs - Whether there was misdirection by trial judge - Whether accused rebutted presumption of knowledge - Whether conviction safe - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 182A(1) - Whether complied with Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 37(d) & 39B(1)(a) LAND LAW Alienation of land - Road reserve - State Authority's decision to revoke road reserve and alienate it to fourth respondent - Judicial review - Application for - Failure to comply with provisions under s. 64(1) National Land Code - Whether decision to alienate null and void - Whether decision susceptible to judicial review - Whether applicant adversely affected by alienation of land - Whether land gazetted as reserved land - Whether a State land - Powers of State Authority to alienate land - Whether challenged - Whether alienation made for public purpose - Whether State Authority made as a party to application - Whether decision to alienate land set aside - National Land Code, ss. 5, 16(2), 40(a), 44(1)(b), 62 & 76(aa)(iii) Conveyancing - Transfer of property - Co-ownership - Application by majority share owners to compel co-owners to sell share in property - Absence of evidence that conditions for termination of co-proprietorship were satisfied - Whether court could exercise power to terminate co-proprietorship - Whether issue fell within ambit of 'in any cause or matter relating to land' under para. 3 of Schedule (Additional Powers of the High Court) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - National Land Code, ss. 145 & 417 Transfer - Estate land - Absence of approval from Estate Land Board for transfer of land - Transfer in contravention of s. 214A(1) of National Land Code - Whether registration of title under void instrument excluded from indefeasibility protection - Whether transfer liable to be set aside - National Land Code, s. 340 Transfer of land - Registrar of Titles - Breach of statutory duty - Negligence - Whether transfer illegal, null and void - Duty and powers of appellant - Whether administrative in nature - Duty of care - Whether arose - Whether transfer of lands used fake land titles - Whether inference could be drawn that fake computerised documents of title was issued by Land Office - Whether appellant acted in bad faith when accepting instruments as fit for registration - Reinstatement of true registered owner as lawful owner of lands - Whether appellant merely following previous court order - Whether liability could be imputed to appellant - Whether appellant could seek protection under s. 22 of National Land Code PUBLIC AUTHORITIES Registrar of titles - Breach of statutory duty - Negligence - Transfer of lands - Whether illegal, null and void - Duty and powers of Registrar of titles - Whether administrative in nature - Duty of care - Whether breached - Whether transfer of lands used fake land titles - Whether inference could be drawn that fake computerised documents of title was issued by Land Office - Whether appellant acted in bad faith - Reinstatement of true registered owner as lawful owner of lands - Whether appellant merely following previous court order - Whether liability could be imputed to appellant - Whether appellant could seek protection under s. 22 of National Land Code SUCCESSION Administration - Action for possession of land - Action by co-owner of undivided share of property against administrators of estate - Whether question pertaining to exercise of administrators' duties relevant - Whether co-owner beneficiary of estate - Whether had vested interest - Whether entitled to interfere in affairs of administrator and beneficiaries - Probate and Administration Act 1959, ss. 60 & 68 INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Anggapan bertentangan - Kegagalan pihak pendakwaan memanggil saksi material - Tertuduh dituduh melakukan perbuatan kelucahan terlampau dengan memegang kemaluan mangsa lelaki - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 377D - Sama ada kegagalan pihak pendakwaan memanggil saksi yang berada di tempat kejadian menyebabkan kelompangan pada kes pendakwaan - Sama ada menjejaskan kes pendakwaan - Sama ada anggapan bertentangan wajar dibangkitkan - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 114(g) PERKATAAN & ISTILAH 'anything containing whatsoever' - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952, s. 37(d) - Sama ada terpakai - Sama ada anggapan boleh mengaitkan tertuduh dengan milikan dan pengetahuan atas dadah yang dijumpai dalam kenderaan awam PROSEDUR JENAYAH Pendakwaan - Kes prima facie - Sama ada pembuktian kes di peringkat pendakwaan adalah atas ujian prima facie - Sama ada penilaian maksima dibuat terhadap keterangan - Sama ada tertuduh berhak menyoal balas saksi - Sama ada keterangan boleh diterima sebagai prima facie hanya bila tertuduh berhak menyoal balas saksi - Sama ada terdapat pelanggaran hak asasi terhadap tertuduh Rayuan - Hukuman - Tertuduh disabitkan atas pertuduhan perbuatan kelucahan melampau - Tertuduh dijatuhkan hukuman penjara 18 bulan - Sama ada hukuman berlebihan atau memadai - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 377D Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap pelepasan dan pembebasan - Pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Dadah dijumpai dalam teksi awam dinaiki ramai penumpang - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 37(d) ADB terpakai - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai milikan eksklusif atas teksi - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai kawalan, jagaan dan pengetahuan atas dadah - Tingkah laku tertuduh - Sama ada konsisten dengan perlakuan seseorang yang melakukan kesalahan - Keberhampiran dadah dengan kedua-dua tertuduh - Sama ada cukup untuk membuktikan niat bersama antara tertuduh di bawah s. 34 Kanun Keseksaan - Sama ada keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi wajar dikekalkan UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 39B(1)(a) - Pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Methamphetamine seberat 1,689.20g - Dadah dijumpai dalam teksi awam dinaiki ramai penumpang - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 37(d) ADB terpakai - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai milikan eksklusif atas teksi - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai kawalan, jagaan dan pengetahuan atas dadah - Tingkah laku tertuduh - Sama ada konsisten dengan perlakuan seseorang yang melakukan kesalahan - Keberhampiran dadah dengan kedua-dua tertuduh - Sama ada mencukupi untuk membuktikan niat bersama di antara tertuduh di bawah s. 34 Kanun Keseksaan Kesalahan - Perbuatan kelucahan melampau - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 377D - Tertuduh memegang kemaluan mangsa lelaki - Pembelaan bahawa tertuduh sekadar menjalankan perubatan batin dan tradisional atas mangsa - Sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan intipati kesalahan - Sama ada mangsa rela - Sama ada kerelaan salah satu intipati kesalahan - Sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan kes prima facie - Sama ada pembelaan berjaya menimbulkan keraguan munasabah terhadap kes pendakwaan |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ARTICLES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LNS Article(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert Updated
Revoked
|
