|
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 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DATO' SUKRI HJ MOHAMED v. WAN MUHAMMAD AZRI WAN DERIS [2016] 4 CLJ 654 TORT: Defamation - Defamatory statements - Publication of defamatory articles on blog - Whether respondent's identity as blogger proved - Whether statements in blog referred to appellant - Whether statements in articles defamatory in nature - Whether defence of qualified privilege, justification and fair comment established EVIDENCE: Witness - Witness statement - Oral testimony - Failure to provide documentary evidence in support of oral testimony - Whether rendered oral evidence of witness not be believed - Whether trial judge failed to consider ss. 59 and 60 of Evidence Act 1950
ROSLEE JALAL v. ZAINAL ABIDIN ABDULLAH [2016] 4 CLJ 909 LAND LAW: Caveats - Competing caveats - Removal - Sale of property - Sale and purchase agreements with two purchasers on different occasions - Purchasers entered caveats resulting in competing caveats - Priority over property - Whether applicant was aggrieved party - Whether applicant had caveatable interest - Determination of which private caveat should be removed - National Land Code, s. 327 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LATEST CASES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Legal Network Series
CLJ 2016 Volume 4 (Part 5) FEDERAL COURT Hap Seng Plantations (River Estates) Sdn Bhd v. Excess Interpoint Sdn Bhd & Anor COURT OF APPEAL Dato' Sukri Hj Mohamed v. Wan Muhammad Azri Wan Deris MMC Oil & Gas Engineering Sdn Bhd v. Tan Bock Kwee & Sons Sdn Bhd Ng Chin Chai v. Pentadbir Tanah Segamat & Other Appeals Public Bank Bhd v. Johan Shipping Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal RA Gunaseharan Appoo v. Shaifulbahari Zakaria & Anor HIGH COURT Ho Min Hao & Anor v. Ho Yee Chin & Anor Noor Shariful Rizal Noor Zawawi lwn. PP Nooralina Mohd Shah & Anor v. PP PP v. Dharma Raj Ballurajah & Anor United Allied Empire Sdn Bhd v. Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Selangor & Ors SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review - Application for - Acquisition of land for public purpose - Allegation of deception and deprivation of land - Whether procedural impropriety involved in acquisition process - Whether use of land to build mosque with complete amenities derailed from essence that acquisition was for public purpose - Whether sufficient notice given to land owner - Whether procedural impropriety arose BANKING Securities for advances - Charge - Company in liquidation - Fixed and floating charge created in favour of bank over vessels during pendency of restraining order - Vessels sold by liquidators - Whether charges were fixed charges - Whether vessels could only be sold with consent of bank - Failure to obtain consent - Whether bank entitled to proceeds of sale - Failure to file discharge of charge over vessel - Whether fixed charge valid and binding against chargor - Res judicata - Whether applicable CIVIL PROCEDURE Appeal - Decision of High Court - Acquisition of land - Order of compensation issued by High Court Judge - Whether appealable - Calamas Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Batang Padang - Applicability - Land Acquisition Act 1960, ss. 40D(3), 49(1) Transfer of proceedings - From one High Court to another - Jurisdiction - Whether High Court in Malaya could transfer proceedings before it to High Court in Sabah and Sarawak, and vice versa - Federal Constitution, art. 121 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 23, 25(1) & (2), para 12 of Schedule thereto - Rules of Court 2012, O. 57 r. 1 Trial - Finding of fact - Main contractor entered into consortium agreement for project involving crude storage tanks - Consortium agreement expressly provided for appointment of subcontractor by main contractor - Subcontractor undertook works under project - Main contractor faced financial difficulties and encountered problems in paying subcontractor's claims for works done - Subcontractor carried out and completed works based on assurance that monies would be set aside to pay claims - High Court held that consortium liable to subcontractor for unpaid monies for works done - Whether subcontractor party and privy to consortium agreement - Whether trial judge misread documentary evidence - Whether conclusion erroneous COMPANY LAW Insider trading - Offence of - Charges under s. 89E(2)(a) and punishable under s. 89E(4) of Securities Industry Act 1983 ('SIA') - Whether s. 89E(4) of SIA infringes art. 8(1) of Federal Constitution - Whether penal provision of s. 89E(4) of SIA exists side by side with ss. 90 and 90A of SIA - Civil liability - Whether discriminatory in nature - Guideline for classification - Whether reasonable and permissible CONSTITUTIONAL LAW High Court - Jurisdiction - High Court of Malaya and High Court of Sabah and Sarawak - Jurisdiction to transfer case from one High Court to another - Whether High Court in Malaya could transfer proceedings before it to High Court in Sabah and Sarawak, and vice versa - Federal Constitution, art. 121 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 23, 25(1) & (2), para 12 of Schedule thereto - Rules of Court 2012, O. 57 r. 1 CONTRACT Privity - Subcontract - Consortium agreement - Main contractor entered into consortium agreement for project involving crude storage tanks - Consortium agreement expressly provided for appointment of subcontractor by main contractor - Subcontractor undertook works under project - Main contractor faced financial difficulties and encountered problems in paying subcontractor's claims for works done - Subcontractor carried out and completed works based on assurance that monies would be set aside to pay claims - Whether subcontractor party and privy to consortium agreement - Whether consortium liable to subcontractor for unpaid monies for works done CRIMINAL LAW Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder - Defence - Mistaken identity - Allegation of - Whether accused persons properly and positively identified as perpetrators of crime - Whether conviction safe Statutory offences - Securities Industry Act 1983 - Charges under s. 89E(2)(a) and punishable under s. 89E(4) of Securities Industry Act 1983 ('SIA') - Whether penal provision of s. 89E(4) of SIA exists side by side with ss. 90 and 90A of SIA - Civil liability - Whether discriminatory in nature - Guideline for classification - Whether reasonable and permissible EVIDENCE Identification parade - Conduct of - Identification of accused persons - Whether accused persons properly and positively identified - Whether identification made in ideal circumstances - Whether prima facie case established - Turnbull guidelines - Whether complied with - Whether conviction safe Witness - Witness statement - Oral testimony - Failure to provide documentary evidence in support of oral testimony - Whether rendered oral evidence of witness not be believed - Whether trial judge failed to consider ss. 59 and 60 of Evidence Act 1950 LAND LAW Acquisition of land - Acquisition for public purpose - Allegation of deception and deprivation of land - Whether purpose of acquisition fell within s. 3 of Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Whether use of land to build mosque with complete amenities fell within the ambit of 'public purpose' - Whether acquisition within knowledge and awareness of land owner - Whether procedural impropriety arose Acquisition of land - Award of compensation - Appeal against quantum - Whether appellant precluded from appealing against order of compensation issued by High Court Judge - Calamas Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Batang Padang - Applicability - Land Acquisition Act 1960, ss. 40D(3), 49(1) LEGAL PROFESSION Disciplinary Committee - Findings of - Client lodged complaint against solicitor for mismanagement of claim - Disciplinary Committee considered additional charges against solicitor - Whether solicitor informed about additional charges - Disciplinary Committee made findings not within terms of complaints made by complainant - Whether solicitor accorded full opportunity to defend himself - Whether solicitor denied rights to due notice of additional charges, to present evidence and to cross-examine TORT Defamation - Defamatory statements - Publication of defamatory articles on blog - Whether respondent's identity as blogger proved - Whether statements in blog referred to appellant - Whether statements in articles defamatory in nature - Whether defence of qualified privilege, justification and fair comment established TRUSTS Illegality - Recovery of trust property - Constructive trust - Whether existed - Whether trust created for benefit of trustees - Whether trust created to defeat creditors in event of bankruptcy - Whether transaction tainted with illegality - Whether trust could only be created by person who owned trust property - Whether trust registered - Whether there was certainty as to identity of beneficiaries - Whether plaintiffs had locus standi to institute claim - Whether claim barred by doctrine of laches - Tinker v. Tinker - Whether applicable WORDS & PHRASES 'information' - Securities Industry Act 1983 - Section 89 - Meaning of - Statutory definition includes 'matters relating to the future' - Whether plain and unambiguous - Whether s. 89 infringes art. 5(1) of Federal Constitution 'Local jurisdiction' - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 3 - Local jurisdiction of High Court of Malaya and High Court of Sabah and Sarawak - Power to transfer proceedings from one High Court to another 'Without prejudice' - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 25(1) & (2) - Jurisdiction and powers of High Court - Whether denoting that additional powers of High Court as in Schedule to Act should not be inconsistent with art. 121 of Federal Constitution that there should be two separate High Courts with their own territorial jurisdiction INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Terima masuk - Spesimen air kencing - Prosedur pengambilan dan penganalisaan - Sama ada teratur - Sama ada memenuhi s. 31A(1A) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada kegagalan mematuhi IGSO Bab F arahan administratif oleh Ketua Polis Negara menjejaskan keputusan ujian air kencing - Sama ada mandatori bagi pihak polis menyediakan dua botol sampel air kencing - Sama ada pengambilan satu sampel air kencing memprejudiskan perayu PROSEDUR JENAYAH Perbicaraan - Kes prima facie - Sama ada terbukti - Penyalahgunaan dadah - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952, s. 15(1) ('Akta') - Sabitan dan hukuman - Rayuan terhadap - Prosedur pengambilan dan penganalisaan spesimen air kencing - Sama ada teratur - Sama ada memenuhi s. 31A(1A) Akta - Sama ada kegagalan mematuhi IGSO Bab F arahan administratif oleh Ketua Polis Negara menjejaskan ujian air kencing - Sama ada sabitan boleh diketepikan - Sama ada mandatori bagi pihak polis menyediakan dua botol sampel air kencing - Sama ada pengambilan satu sampel air kencing memprejudiskan perayu - Sama ada kes prima facie dibuktikan terhadap tertuduh berasaskan kepada s. 37(k) Akta - Sama ada sabitan dan hukuman harus dikekalkan UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 15 (1) - Penyalahgunaan dadah - Sabitan dan hukuman - Rayuan terhadap - Prosedur pengambilan dan penganalisaan spesimen air kencing - Sama ada teratur - Sama ada memenuhi s. 31A(1A) Akta - Sama ada kegagalan mematuhi IGSO Bab F arahan administratif oleh Ketua Polis Negara menjejaskan ujian air kencing - Sama ada sabitan boleh diketepikan - Sama ada mandatori bagi pihak polis menyediakan dua botol sampel air kencing - Sama ada pengambilan satu sampel air kencing memprejudiskan perayu - Sama ada kes prima facie dibuktikan terhadap tertuduh berasaskan kepada s. 37(k) - Sama ada sabitan dan hukuman harus dikekalkan CLJ 2016 Volume 4 (Part 6) FEDERAL COURT Lucy Wong Nyuk King & Anor v. Hwang Mee Hiong COURT OF APPEAL Christopher Bandi v. Tumbung Nakis & Anor; Jamil Sindi (Third Party) Lim Tee Keong v. HLG Securities Sdn Bhd Mascon Rinota Sdn Bhd & Ors v. Rinota Construction Sdn Bhd United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd v. Lee Yaw Lin & Anor HIGH COURT Datuk Ir Hj Amran Mohd Yusoff & Ors v. Pengarah Penyelesaian Tanah Kelantan & Ors PP v. Tay Ee Hung Roslee Jalal v. Zainal Abidin Abdullah Tanjung Langsat Port Sdn Bhd v. Trafigura Pte Ltd & Another Case SUBJECT INDEX ARBITRATION Award - Setting aside - Application to set aside partial award granted by majority tribunal of arbitration - Whether majority tribunal acted in excess of jurisdiction - Whether decision involved 'new difference' - Whether application amounted to challenging decision on effect of agreements under guise - Whether permissible in law - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 37 Award - Setting aside - Grounds to set aside - Breach of rules of natural justice - Whether breaches would ipso facto mean that arbitral award would be in conflict with public policy - Whether breach of natural justice caused actual prejudice - Failure to give reasons for decision - Whether formed valid ground for setting aside - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 37 Award - Setting aside - Reliance on novation and rescission to set aside award - Failure to raise novation and rescission during arbitration proceeding - Whether plaintiff could raise novation and rescission in present application - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 37 BANKRUPTCY Discharge - Application for - Exercise of court's discretion - Whether Director General of Insolvency ('DGI') conducted thorough investigations into assets of bankrupt - Failure by bankrupt to file statement of affairs within 21 days after receiving order - Whether an offence under Bankruptcy Act 1967 - Whether non-compliance tantamounted to breach of statutory provision - Whether discharge ought to be allowed - Bankruptcy Act 1967, ss. 16(3) & 33(3) CIVIL PROCEDURE Amendment - Writ and statement of claim - Application to include additional claim - Whether application could be made at any stage of proceedings - Decision of sessions court to dismiss application - Whether appealable - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 3 - Whether fell under definition of 'decision' COMPANY LAW Members' rights - Minority shareholders - Action brought under s. 181 of Companies Act 1965 - Allegation of oppressive acts to shareholder's interest - Delay in filing petition - Whether amounted to acquiescence - Whether court should deny relief to interested party who sat on his rights Members' rights - Minority shareholders - Action brought under s. 181 of Companies Act 1965 - Whether oppressive acts to shareholder's interest existed - Whether shareholder barred from directly relying on losses of company to seek relief - Whether proceedings should be brought in name of company by way of derivative action under s. 181A of Companies Act 1965 - 'Reflective loss principle' - Whether remedies under s. 181 of Companies Act 1965 should be granted to shareholder CONTRACT Agreement - Construction of clauses - Sale and purchase of property - Whether contract to be construed as a whole - Deeming provision in cl. 5 of SPA that vacant possession of property delivered to purchaser upon signing of agreement - Whether conclusive or rebuttable - Whether vacant possession delivered to purchaser before occurrence of fire - Whether cl. 16 of SPA implied delivery of vacant possession not deemed conclusive upon signing of SPA - Whether purchaser could rely on cl. 15 of SPA to terminate contract Sale and purchase agreement - Sale and purchase of property - Breach - Allegation of - Property damaged by fire before payment of balance purchase price - Delivery of vacant possession - Deeming provision in sale and purchase agreement ('SPA') that vacant possession of property delivered to purchaser upon signing of agreement - Whether rebuttable or conclusive - Whether vacant possession delivered to purchaser before occurrence of fire - Whether purchaser's termination of agreement justified CRIMINAL LAW Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder - Witnesses saw accused stabbing deceased - Inconsistencies in evidence of witnesses - Whether raised serious doubts on prosecution's case - Hearsay - Whether admissible - Whether there were serious flaws in conduct of identification parade - Whether accused wrongly implicated - Failure to call material witnesses - Whether prosecution exercised discretion objectively - Prima facie case - Whether established EVIDENCE Witness - Credibility - Prosecution's witnesses - Inconsistencies in evidence of witnesses - Whether raised serious doubts on prosecution's case - Whether accused wrongly implicated - Failure to call material witnesses - Whether prosecution exercised discretion objectively LAND LAW Caveats - Competing caveats - Removal - Sale of property - Sale and purchase agreements with two purchasers on different occasions - Purchasers entered caveats resulting in competing caveats - Priority over property - Whether applicant was aggrieved party - Whether applicant had caveatable interest - Determination of which private caveat should be removed - National Land Code, s. 327 Interest in property - Indefeasibility of title and interests - Portion of land registered under owners' names transferred to claimants - Penolong Pentadbir Tanah Jajahan ('PPTJ') made order under s. 7 of Kelantan Land Settlement Act 1955 resulting in land divided into two - Whether order valid - Whether PPTJ acted in accordance with law - Whether order binding on registered owners - Whether title conferred under registered owners indefeasible - Whether claimants successfully proved interest in land - Whether registered owners suffered damages TORT Negligence - Liability clause - Exclusion of - Bank's agreement for hire of safety box - Efficacy of exclusion clause - Whether exclusion clause comprised part of contract governing legal relationship between parties - Whether customer bound by contract - Whether lawful for bank to limit its liability WORDS & PHRASES 'shall be deemed' - Provision of clause in agreement - Whether a rebuttable presumption - Whether application of deeming provisions limited to extent needed to avoid injustice or absurdity |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ARTICLES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LNS Article(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert Updated
Revoked
|
