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

PP lwn. MOHD FADHLI KHAHARRUDIN [2016] 8 CLJ 135
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, KUANTAN
HASSAN ABDUL GHANI PK
[RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: 41LB-37-12-2015]
2 JULAI 2016

PILIHAN RAYA: Kesalahan - Memiliki kertas undi luar tempat mengundi - Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954, s. 3(1)(h) - Tertuduh mendapat kertas undi buat kali kedua dan menyimpannya - Tertuduh membawa keluar kertas undi dari tempat mengundi untuk mengadu kepada polis - Sama ada niat menghalalkan cara - Sempadan atau lingkungan tempat mengundi - Akta Pilihan Raya 1958, ss. 2 & 7 - Peraturan-Peraturan Pilihan Raya (Penjalanan Pilihan Raya) 1981 - Sama ada perlu dipatuhi oleh setiap pengundi

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap pelepasan dan pembebasan - Rayuan oleh pihak pendakwaan - Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954, s. 3(1)(h) - Kesalahan memiliki kertas undi luar tempat mengundi - Sama ada intipati pertuduhan berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada kes prima facie berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada tertuduh membangkitkan keraguan munasabah terhadap pertuduhan

Legal Network Series

CLJ 2016 Volume 8 (Part 1)

COURT OF APPEAL

Boustead Hotels & Resort Sdn Bhd v. Basiah Jaafar & Ors
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat JJCA
(Civil Procedure; Labour Law - Employment - Dismissal - Constructive dismissal) [2016] 8 CLJ 1 [CA]

Karpal Singh Ram Singh v. PP & Another Appeal
Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Kamardin Hashim JJCA
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Sedition Act 1948 - Section 4(1)(b) - Appellant accused of making seditious comments at a press conference) [2016] 8 CLJ 15 [CA]

Karpal Singh Ram Singh v. PP & Another Appeal (No 2)
Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Kamardin Hashim JJCA
(Criminal Procedure - Sentence - Appeal against - Conviction under s. 4(1)(b) of Sedition Act 1948) [2016] 8 CLJ 65 [CA]

Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Dharshan Singh Atma Singh
David Wong Dak Wah, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Zamani A Rahim JJCA
(Legal Profession - Roll of Advocates and Solicitors - Restoration on Roll - Discharge of duties) [2016] 8 CLJ 70 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Mechanalysis Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) v. Appraisal Property Management Sdn Bhd
Mohd Nazlan Ghazali JC
(Arbitration; Company Law - Award - Security for costs - Setting aside) [2016] 8 CLJ 81 [HC]

MKC Corporate & Business Advisory Sdn Bhd lwn. Cubic Electronics Sdn Bhd & Yang Lain
Hadhariah Syed Ismail H
(Prosedur Sivil - Penghinaan mahkamah - Perintah komital - Permohonan) [2016] 8 CLJ 104 [HC]

Monument Mining Ltd & Anor v. Emas Kehidupan Sdn Bhd & Ors
Lim Chong Fong JC
(Contract - Rescission - Breach - Allegation of) [2016] 8 CLJ 109 [HC]

PP lwn. Mohd Fadhli Khaharrudin
Hassan Abdul Ghani PK
(Pilihan Raya; Prosedur Jenayah - Kesalahan - Memiliki kertas undi luar tempat mengundi - Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954, s. 3(1)(h)) [2016] 8 CLJ 135 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

ARBITRATION

Award - Security for costs - Setting aside - Mode of application to set aside award for security for costs - Whether leave of winding up court required - Whether High Court has powers to grant order for security - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 42(8)
Mechanalysis Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) v. Appraisal Property Management Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali JC) [2016] 8 CLJ 81 [HC]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Parties - Joinder - Appellant took over liability of wound up employer company - Appellant joined as party to proceedings by employee at Industrial Court - Whether decision binding and effective upon appellant - Whether nexus between employee and appellant established - Industrial Relations Act 1967, ss. 29(a), 32(1)(a)
Boustead Hotels & Resort Sdn Bhd v. Basiah Jaafar & Ors
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 1 [CA]

COMPANY LAW

Winding up - Security for costs - Mode of application to set aside award for security for costs - Whether leave of winding up court required - Whether application made for security for costs an action defensive in nature - Companies Act 1965, s. 226(3) - Whether applicable
Mechanalysis Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) v. Appraisal Property Management Sdn Bhd
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali JC) [2016] 8 CLJ 81 [HC]

CONTRACT

Rescission - Breach - Allegation of - Parties executed agreement - Whether agreement based on warranty or representation of transfer of mining lease - Whether transfer a pre-condition to agreement becoming effective - Whether a commercial risk assumed by plaintiffs - Defendants' failure to utilise best endeavours to obtain approval of transfer - Whether a non-performance of agreement - Whether plaintiffs entitled to rescind agreement - Unjust enrichment - Whether defendants should not profit from failure to fulfil agreement - Whether inequitable for defendants to retain benefit derived from agreement - Whether there was failure of consideration
Monument Mining Ltd & Anor v. Emas Kehidupan Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Lim Chong Fong JC) [2016] 8 CLJ 109 [HC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Sedition Act 1948 - Section 4(1)(b) - Appellant accused of making seditious comments at a press conference - Whether appellant questioned prerogative powers of Sultan of Perak - Whether Sedition Act unconstitutional and contrary to art. 10(2) of the Federal Constitution - Whether charge against appellant defective - Whether statements made had seditious tendency within ambit of s. 3(1)(a), (d) and (f) of Sedition Act 1948 - Whether appellant's speech intended to bring hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against Ruler of State or Government - Whether appellant succeeded in establishing defence under s. 3(2)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 - Whether appellant denied a fair trial - Whether conviction safe
Karpal Singh Ram Singh v. PP & Another Appeal
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Kamardin Hashim JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 15 [CA]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Appellant accused of making seditious comments at a press conference - Sedition Act 1948, s. 4(1)(b) - Whether appellant questioned prerogative powers of Sultan of Perak - Whether Sedition Act unconstitutional and contrary to art. 10(2) of the Federal Constitution - Whether charge against appellant defective - Whether appellant had mens rea in making statements which had seditious tendency within ambit of s. 3(1)(a), (d) and (f) of Sedition Act 1948 - Whether appellant's speech intended to bring hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against Ruler of State or Government - Whether appellant succeeded in establishing defence under s. 3(2)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 - Whether appellant denied a fair trial - Whether conviction safe
Karpal Singh Ram Singh v. PP & Another Appeal
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Kamardin Hashim JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 15 [CA]

Sentence - Appeal against - Conviction under s. 4(1)(b) of Sedition Act 1948 - Mitigating factors - Whether considered - Whether appellant a respectable public figure - Whether sentence set aside - Whether substituted with a lighter fine of not more than RM2,000
Karpal Singh Ram Singh v. PP & Another Appeal (No 2)
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Kamardin Hashim JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 65 [CA]

LABOUR LAW

Employment - Dismissal - Constructive dismissal - Whether established - Claim for back wages and reinstatement - Whether claimant could introduce evidence of her last drawn salary - Whether Industrial Court correct in awarding 12 months back wages - Claimant aged 58 when final award handed down - Whether claimant eligible to be reinstated - Whether award for compensation in lieu of reinstatement ought to be quashed
Boustead Hotels & Resort Sdn Bhd v. Basiah Jaafar & Ors
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 1 [CA]

LEGAL PROFESSION

Roll of Advocates and Solicitors - Restoration on Roll - Discharge of duties - Advocate and solicitor committed serious acts of dishonesty and/or fraudulent conduct - Advocate and solicitor struck off Roll but restored on Roll by High Court - Restitution of monies owing made six months after application for reinstatement - Whether restitution an afterthought - Whether restitution grossly delayed - Whether advocate and solicitor truly showed repentance of past deeds - Whether fit and proper person to be re-admitted to Roll - Legal Profession Act 1976, ss. 94(3) & 107
Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Dharshan Singh Atma Singh (David Wong Dak Wah, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Zamani A Rahim JJCA) [2016] 8 CLJ 70 [CA]

INDEKS PERKARA

PILIHAN RAYA

Kesalahan - Memiliki kertas undi luar tempat mengundi - Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954, s. 3(1)(h) - Tertuduh mendapat kertas undi buat kali kedua dan menyimpannya - Tertuduh membawa keluar kertas undi dari tempat mengundi untuk mengadu kepada polis - Sama ada niat menghalalkan cara - Sempadan atau lingkungan tempat mengundi - Akta Pilihan Raya 1958, ss. 2 & 7 - Peraturan-Peraturan Pilihan Raya (Penjalanan Pilihan Raya) 1981 - Sama ada perlu dipatuhi oleh setiap pengundi
PP lwn. Mohd Fadhli Khaharrudin
(Hassan Abdul Ghani PK) [2016] 8 CLJ 135 [HC]

PROSEDUR JENAYAH

Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap pelepasan dan pembebasan - Rayuan oleh pihak pendakwaan - Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954, s. 3(1)(h) - Kesalahan memiliki kertas undi luar tempat mengundi - Sama ada intipati pertuduhan berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada kes prima facie berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada tertuduh membangkitkan keraguan munasabah terhadap pertuduhan
PP lwn. Mohd Fadhli Khaharrudin
(Hassan Abdul Ghani PK) [2016] 8 CLJ 135 [HC]

PROSEDUR SIVIL

Penghinaan mahkamah - Perintah komital - Permohonan - Pengusikan dokumen yang dikemukakan di mahkamah - Sama ada dilakukan untuk menghalang dan mengecewakan pentadbiran keadilan mahkamah - Sama ada menghina mahkamah - Sama ada permohonan perintah komital harus dibenarkan
MKC Corporate & Business Advisory Sdn Bhd lwn. Cubic Electronics Sdn Bhd & Yang Lain
(Hadhariah Syed Ismail H) [2016] 8 CLJ 104 [HC]

LNS Article(s)

1. EMPLOYMENT LAW CAN AN EMPLOYER UNILATERALLY VARY SERVICE CHARGES?* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   WONG KIAN JUN** [2016] 1 LNS(A) lxxix

[2016] 1 LNS(A) lxxix



MALAYSIA

---

EMPLOYMENT LAW
CAN AN EMPLOYER UNILATERALLY VARY SERVICE CHARGES?*

WONG KIAN JUN**

IN THIS ARTICLE, WONG KIAN JUN DISCUSSES THE CASE OF NATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL, BAR & RESTAURANT WORKERS, PENINSULAR MALAYSIA V. AYER KEROH RESORT SDN BHD ON WHETHER AN EMPLOYER CAN UNILATERALLY VARY SERVICE CHARGES

Facts

A hotly debated issue these past few months is the issue of service charge imposed by hotels and restaurants. In the recent case of National Union of Hotel, Bar & Restaurant Workers, Peninsular Malaysia v. Ayer Keroh Resort Sdn Bhd, the Industrial Court considered whether Mahkota Hotel Melaka ("Hotel") could reduce the service charge imposed on customers from 10% to 5%. A collective agreement was entered into between the Hotel and the Union which had provided for the imposition of service charge of 10%.

. . .

* Published with kind permission of M/s Shearn Delamore & Co.

** Employment And Administrative Law Practice Group.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. MARITIME INTERCEPTION AND OPERATION: A REVIEW OF INTERFACE BETWEEN MULTIMISSIONED MARITIME SERVICES IN NIGERIA AND MALAYSIA ^{[Read excerpt]}
   ABDULRAZAQ O. ABDULKADIR, PH.D* [2016] 1 LNS(A) lxxx

[2016] 1 LNS(A) lxxx



NIGERIA / MALAYSIA

---

MARITIME INTERCEPTION AND OPERATION: A REVIEW OF INTERFACE BETWEEN
MULTIMISSIONED MARITIME SERVICES IN NIGERIA AND MALAYSIA

ABDULRAZAQ O. ABDULKADIR PH.D*

Abstract

Nigeria and Malaysia are two countries endowed with seas and the two countries have enacted legal frameworks and established agencies to address the menace of insecurity in ports and the maritime domains. Interestingly, the two countries are also members of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). Both countries among other benefits charge fees on cargoes loaded or unloaded at ports and this significantly serves as a source of income, which no doubt enhances economic development. In this paper, it was observed that economic gains from the ports and maritime domain are not without their attendant risks inhibiting the fortunes derived from the seas despite legal and administrative machineries to surmount the challenges. This article considers some areas of interface, benefits and shortcomings in the legal and administrative agencies of maritime security in Nigeria and Malaysia. This article concludes by demonstrating that the legal framework in Nigeria and Malaysia on port and maritime security are virtually the same with little differences but there are a lot to be learnt from the implementation strategies of the Malaysian port and maritime security agencies especially in the areas operational strategies and provisions of basic amenities like stable electricity which is one of the panaceas to tame stowaway passengers among other insecurity in the port and maritime domain.

. . .

* Ph.D. (IIUM, Malaysia), LL.M (Ile-Ife, Nigeria), LL.B (Ilorin, Nigeria), BL, Lecturer, Department of Private & Property Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ilorin. Email-kor181law@gmail.com. Phone No. +2348032415849.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

CLJ Article(s)

1. FIDUCIARIES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DECEASED'S ESTATE:THE TWO DISTINCT CAPACITIES OF PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES AND TRUSTEES ^{[Read excerpt]}
   DR AKMAL HIDAYAH HALIM*NOR AZLINA MOHD NOOR** [2016] 8 CLJ(A) i

[2016] 8 CLJ(A) i



MALAYSIA

---

FIDUCIARIES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DECEASED'S ESTATE:
THE TWO DISTINCT CAPACITIES OF PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES AND TRUSTEES

DR AKMAL HIDAYAH HALIM*
NOR AZLINA MOHD NOOR**

Introduction

Personal representative is one of the most important figures in the dramatis personae, a drama in human relationships that normally involves elements of struggle, plight, honesty and fraud in the administration of a deceased's estate. This is due to the fact that upon a person's death, his estate does not simply glide between his legal heirs but instead enters into a kind of limbo. Thus, the office of personal representative requires a person who must at the utmost ensure himself to have a solemn understanding of his duties and obligations. A personal representative is in a fiduciary relationship with the estate beneficiaries; a relationship which undeniably encompasses many essential elements of trust. The personal representative is held to the highest degree of good faith in performing his duties and owes fiduciary responsibility to the estate beneficiaries^[1].

In the process of estate administration, one question that has nagged the office of personal representative is that what should be the two distinct capacities of personal representative and trustee since the element of trust is part and parcel of the duties and obligation imposed on the personal representative. In addition, the expression of trustee under the Malaysian Trustee Act 1949 includes the duties incidental to the office of a personal representative. As the role of a personal representative is quite distinct from that of a trustee and is subject to different legal framework and liability, this paper aims to examine the legal position of a personal representative and to identify the line separating the duties of a personal representative from his duties as a trustee. The discussion includes an analysis of the relevant statutory provisions and also the decided cases in order to identify the distinction between the offices of a personal representative to that of a trustee in the administration of the deceased's estate.

. . .

* Associate Professor, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia.

** Lecturer, School of Law, College of Law, Government & International Studies University Utara Malaysia.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert