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

BANK PERUSAHAAN KECIL DAN SEDERHANA MALAYSIA BHD v.
PINGGIR MERPATI SDN BHD & ORS [2016] 9 CLJ 631
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
ALIZATUL KHAIR OSMAN JCA, ABANG ISKANDAR JCA, NALLINI PATHMANATHAN JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: B-02(NCVC)(W)-946-05-2014]
08 AUGUST 2016

BANKING: Loan - Agreement - Disbursement of loan monies - Discovery that borrower's supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Demand for repayment of sums owed - Whether there must be prior termination before bank could demand for any amount due for repayment - Whether termination of loan agreement lawful - Whether bank could claim for repayment of monies owing - Whether loan agreement an on-demand agreement

CONTRACT: Agreement - Loan agreement - Borrower's supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Bank demanded for repayment of sums owed - Allegation that termination of loan agreement unlawful and bank could not claim for repayment of monies owing - Whether there must be prior termination before bank could demand for sums due for repayment

EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence - Admissibility of - Audit report -  Discovery that supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Whether audit report admissible

PP lwn. MUHAMAD AZROIEE OMAR BAKHI [2016] 2 SMC 66
MAHKAMAH MAJISTRET, ALOR SETAR
NUR FAIZAH MUHAMAD SALEH Mj
[KES JENAYAH NO: 83JS-05-12-2013]
4 JANUARI 2016

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kanun Keseksaan - Seksyen 354 - Menggunakan kekerasan jenayah - Perbuatan jenayah seksual terhadap mangsa semasa dalam kereta - Sama ada terdapat keterangan sokongan yang memihak mangsa - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai niat untuk mencabul kehormatan mangsa - Tindakan mangsa untuk melepaskan diri daripada tertuduh - Sama ada diambil kira - Sama ada mangsa lambat membuat laporan polis - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh suatu fikiran kemudian - Sama ada faktor usia dan kepentingan awam diambil kira dalam menjatuhkan hukuman

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Hukuman - Pertimbangan - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 354 - Menggunakan kekerasan jenayah - Perbuatan jenayah seksual terhadap mangsa semasa dalam kereta - Mencabul kehormatan mangsa - Faktor-faktor yang diambil kira - Umur tertuduh - Kesalahan pertama - Kepentingan awam - Sama ada kesalahan tertuduh dipandang serius dari sisi undang-undang - Sama ada hukuman berat yang setimpal dengan kesalahan harus diberikan

Legal Network Series

CLJ 2016 Volume 9 (Part 5)

COURT OF APPEAL

Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd v. Razshah Enterprises Sdn Bhd
Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Abdul Rahman Sebli, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JJCA
(Land Law - Order for sale of land - Default in repayment of loan - Allegation of new agreement - Whether loan agreement varied) [2016] 9 CLJ 617 [CA]

Bank Perusahaan Kecil Dan Sederhana Malaysia Bhd v. Pinggir Merpati Sdn Bhd & Ors
Alizatul Khair Osman, Abang Iskandar, Nallini Pathmanathan JJCA
(Banking; Contract; Evidence - Loan - Demand for repayment of sums owed - Whether there must be prior termination - Whether an on-demand agreement - Admissibility of audit report) [2016] 9 CLJ 631 [CA]

Emery Shazmal Abd Malek v. PP & Other Appeals
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Kamardin Hashim JJCA
(Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Death sentence - Whether defence probable and raised doubts on prosecution's case - Whether convictions and sentences safe) [2016] 9 CLJ 644 [CA]

Hong Leong Bank Bhd v. PP
Md Raus Sharif PCA, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA
(Criminal Procedure - Forfeiture - Principles governing - Order for return of forfeited car with conditions - Whether order made in course and during hearing of criminal trial - Whether final order) [2016] 9 CLJ 672 [CA]

Ogbodo Sunday Tochukwau v. PP & Other Appeals
Aziah Ali, Ahmadi Asnawi, Zamani A Rahim JJCA
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in - Appeal - Whether trial judge ignored requirement of fair trial - Whether there was a failure of justice - Whether conviction safe) [2016] 9 CLJ 686 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Armada (Singapore) Pte Ltd v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd
Lau Bee Lan J
(Arbitration - Award of arbitrator - Application to set aside order granting leave to enforce arbitration award - Issue of novation - Whether an issue of merits) [2016] 9 CLJ 709 [HC]

Kalam Wahid lwn. Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
Abu Bakar Katar PK
(Prosedur Jenayah - Habeas corpus - Nama pemohon didaftarkan dalam Daftar Penjenayah sebelum dapatan pegawai inkuiri disahkan oleh Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah - Sama ada ketidakpatuhan peruntukan s. 12(1) Akta Kesalahan Keselamatan (Langkah-langkah Khas) 2012) [2016] 9 CLJ 725 [HC]

Merck KGaA v. Leno Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd; The Registrar Of Trade Marks (Interested Party)
Azizah Nawawi J
(Intellectual Property; Civil Procedure - Trade marks - Opposition to application to register mark - Whether marks identical or similar - Affidavits - Manner to bring forward further materials) [2016] 9 CLJ 736 [HC]

Narayanan Murukaiya lwn. Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
Kamaludin Md Said H
(Prosedur Jenayah - Habeas corpus - Permohonan - Sama ada perintah tahanan mematuhi prosedur di bawah s. 10(2) Akta Pencegahan Jenayah 1959) [2016] 9 CLJ 749 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

ARBITRATION

Award of arbitrator - Enforcement and validity - Application to set aside order granting leave to enforce arbitration award - Issue of novation - Whether an issue of merits - Whether relevant to court in determining whether to allow enforcement of an arbitration award - Proper place to challenge validity of arbitration award - Whether at seat of arbitration and not at enforcement court
Armada (Singapore) Pte Ltd v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd
(Lau Bee Lan J) [2016] 9 CLJ 709 [HC]

Award of arbitrator - Enforcement and validity - Application to set aside order granting leave to enforce arbitration award - Omission to include indorsement under O. 69 r. 8(8) Rules of Court 2012 - Whether nullified award - Whether defendant prejudiced by lack of indorsement or statement - Whether erroneous of defendant to invoke O. 67 r. 9 Rules of Court 2012 - Whether Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1958 applicable - Whether there was inordinate delay in filing application - Whether plaintiff's application to amend sealed order to include a notice pursuant to O. 69 r. 8(8) Rules of Court 2012 allowed
Armada (Singapore) Pte Ltd v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd
(Lau Bee Lan J) [2016] 9 CLJ 709 [HC]

BANKING

Loan - Agreement - Disbursement of loan monies - Discovery that borrower's supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Demand for repayment of sums owed - Whether there must be prior termination before bank could demand for any amount due for repayment - Whether termination of loan agreement lawful - Whether bank could claim for repayment of monies owing - Whether loan agreement an on-demand agreement
Bank Perusahaan Kecil Dan Sederhana Malaysia Bhd v. Pinggir Merpati Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Abang Iskandar, Nallini Pathmanathan JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 631 [CA]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Affidavits - Striking out - Application for - Allegation that affidavit exhibited was irrelevant, oppressive and wrongly exhibited additional new document - Manner to bring forward further materials - Whether complied with - Whether application for special leave of court filed - Rules of Court 2012, O. 55
Merck KGaA v. Leno Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd; The Registrar Of Trade Marks (Interested Party)
(Azizah Nawawi J) [2016] 9 CLJ 736 [HC]

CONTRACT

Agreement - Loan agreement - Borrower's supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Bank demanded for repayment of sums owed - Allegation that termination of loan agreement unlawful and bank could not claim for repayment of monies owing - Whether there must be prior termination before bank could demand for sums due for repayment
Bank Perusahaan Kecil Dan Sederhana Malaysia Bhd v. Pinggir Merpati Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Abang Iskandar, Nallini Pathmanathan JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 631 [CA]

CRIMINAL LAW

Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking - Conviction and sentence - Appeal against - Dispensation of justice involving procedural and substantive law - Right to be defended by counsel - Whether trial judge ignored requirement of fair trial - Whether essence of s. 255 of Criminal Procedure Code breached - Failure to comply with s. 257(1) of Criminal Procedure Code - Whether caused prejudice to second accused - Trial judge's refusal to exercise discretion to adjourn trial conferred by s. 259(1) of Criminal Procedure Code - Whether deprived second accused person's right to be heard - Whether there was a failure of justice - Whether conviction tainted
Ogbodo Sunday Tochukwau v. PP & Other Appeals
(Aziah Ali, Ahmadi Asnawi, Zamani A Rahim JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 686 [CA]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Accused persons convicted for offences relating to drugs and poisons - Various drugs and poisons found in house during police raid - Death sentence - Whether prosecution successfully established prima facie case - Accused persons denied knowledge of drugs - Whether defence probable and raised doubts on prosecution's case - Whether mere denial - Whether convictions and sentences safe - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 12(2) & 39B(1)
Emery Shazmal Abd Malek v. PP & Other Appeals
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Ahmadi Asnawi, Kamardin Hashim JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 644 [CA]

Appeal - Right of - Order for return of car seized by police - Whether order finally disposed of rights of parties - Whether order made in course and during hearing of criminal trial - Whether report forming basis of seizure of car by police was matter to be dealt with by civil court - Whether order pertaining to return of car was final order
Hong Leong Bank Bhd v. PP
(Md Raus Sharif PCA, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 672 [CA]

Forfeiture - Principles governing - Order for return of forfeited car with conditions - Appeal against order - Whether police had right to seize car - Purchaser in good faith for valuable consideration - Whether there was evidence of anything unlawful in hire purchase agreement or sale and purchase of car - Whether car fell under 'property alleged or suspected to have been stolen or found under circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of any offence ...' under second limb of s. 413 of Criminal Procedure Code
Hong Leong Bank Bhd v. PP
(Md Raus Sharif PCA, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 672 [CA]

Trial - Procedure - Trafficking of dangerous drugs - Dispensation of justice involving procedural and substantive law - Right to be defended by counsel - Whether trial judge ignored requirement of fair trial - Whether essence of s. 255 of Criminal Procedure Code breached - Failure to comply with s. 257(1) of Criminal Procedure Code - Whether caused prejudice to second accused - Trial judge's refusal to exercise discretion to adjourn trial conferred by s. 259(1) of Criminal Procedure Code - Whether deprived second accused person's right to be heard - Whether there was a failure of justice - Whether conviction tainted
Ogbodo Sunday Tochukwau v. PP & Other Appeals
(Aziah Ali, Ahmadi Asnawi, Zamani A Rahim JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 686 [CA]

EVIDENCE

Documentary evidence - Admissibility of - Audit report - Discovery that supporting documents for application of disbursement of loan monies forged - Whether audit report admissible
Bank Perusahaan Kecil Dan Sederhana Malaysia Bhd v. Pinggir Merpati Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Alizatul Khair Osman, Abang Iskandar, Nallini Pathmanathan JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 631 [CA]

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Trade marks - Registration - Opposition to application to register mark - Registrar of Trade Marks rejected opposition - Appeal against decision of Registrar of Trade Marks - Whether marks identical or similar - Whether marks sufficiently distinguishable - Whether marks visually and confusingly similar - Whether trade channels through which goods bought and sold were the same - Nature of parties' goods - Whether consumers who purchase products sold by parties would be more careful - Whether marks contrary to ss. 10, 14, 19 and 25 of Trade Marks Act 1976
Merck KGaA v. Leno Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd; The Registrar Of Trade Marks (Interested Party)
(Azizah Nawawi J) [2016] 9 CLJ 736 [HC]

LAND LAW

Sale of land - Order of court - Land charged to bank as security for loan - Default in repayment of loan - Allegation of new agreement - Whether loan agreement varied - Whether repayment period extended - Whether chargor allowed to redeem lands in staggered manner - Whether plaintiff breached agreement in refusing to allow redemption of lands - Whether cause to contrary shown - Whether chargor could counterclaim for damages - National Land Code, s. 256
Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd v. Razshah Enterprises Sdn Bhd
(Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Abdul Rahman Sebli & Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JJCA) [2016] 9 CLJ 617 [CA]

INDEKS PERKARA

PROSEDUR JENAYAH

Habeas corpus - Permohonan - Dakwaan ketidakpatuhan prosedur - Perintah tahanan dikeluarkan terhadap pemohon pada hari ke-68 selepas ditangkap - Sama ada ketidakpatuhan kepada s. 4 Akta Pencegahan Jenayah - Sama ada s. 4 memperuntukkan tempoh masa khusus untuk perintah tahanan dikeluarkan - Sama ada perintah tahanan dikeluarkan menurut Peraturan-peraturan Pencegahan Jenayah (Tatacara Lembaga Penasihat) 2014 - Sama ada dakwaan ketidakpatuhan prosedur bermerit
Narayanan Murukaiya lwn. Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
(Kamaludin Md Said H) [2016] 9 CLJ 749 [HC]

Habeas corpus - Permohonan - Pemohon ditangkap di bawah s. 3(1) Akta Pencegahan Jenayah 1959 - Pengerusi Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah memerintahkan tahanan selama dua tahun - Sama ada dapatan pegawai inkuiri diserahkan kepada pemohon dengan serta-merta - Sama ada penyerahan dapatan siasatan kepada pemohon bersifat mandatori - Sama ada terdapat kelewatan dalam penyerahan dapatan - Sama ada membentuk ketidakpatuhan prosedur di bawah s. 10(2) Akta Pencegahan Jenayah 1959
Narayanan Murukaiya lwn. Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
(Kamaludin Md Said H) [2016] 9 CLJ 749 [HC]

Habeas corpus - Permohonan - Pemohon ditangkap di bawah s. 4(1) Akta Kesalahan Keselamatan (Langkah-langkah Khas) 2012 - Nama pemohon didaftarkan dalam Daftar Penjenayah sebelum dapatan pegawai inkuiri disahkan oleh Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah ('LPJ') - Sama ada ketidakpatuhan peruntukan s. 12(1) Akta - Sama ada LPJ perlu mengesahkan terlebih dahulu sebelum nama pemohon didaftarkan dalam Daftar Penjenayah walaupun pemohon tidak memohon kajian semula - Sama ada writ habeas corpus dibenarkan
Kalam Wahid lwn. Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
(Abu Bakar Katar PK) [2016] 9 CLJ 725 [HC]

LNS Article(s)

1. RELIGION, THE RULE OF LAW AND DISCRIMINATION 2014* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   SIR TERENCE ETHERTON** [2016] 1 LNS(A) xcvi

[2016] 1 LNS(A) xcvi



UNITED KINGDOM

---

RELIGION, THE RULE OF LAW AND DISCRIMINATION 2014*

SIR TERENCE ETHERTON**

1. One of the most difficult and contentious areas of our law today is the resolution of disputes generated by a conflict between, on the one hand, the religious beliefs of an individual and, on the other hand, actions which that individual is required to take, whether that requirement is by a public body, a private employer or another individual. The problem is particularly acute where the conflict is directly or indirectly between one individual's religious beliefs and another's non-religious human rights.^[1]

2. It is a subject that affects many countries as they have become more liberal, multicultural and secular.^[2] The issues in countries which are members of the Council of Europe and of the European Union, like England and Wales, are affected by European jurisprudence as well as national law. The development of the law in England is of particular interest because the Protestant Church is the established Church of England but the protection for secular and other non-Protestant minorities has progressed at a pace and in a way that would have been beyond the comprehension of most members of society, including judges and politicians, before the Second World War.

. . .

* Published with kind permission of the Judicial Communications Office, Judiciary of England and Wales (https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ speech-by-sir-terence-etherton-religion-the-rule-law-and-discrimination2.pdf).

** Chancellor of the High Court of England and Wales. This paper was delivered as the 2014 Gray's Inn Reading at Barnard's Inn on 26 June 2014.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. MUST A REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS BE MADE A PARTY?* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   TEO EU JINN [2016] 1 LNS(A) xcix

[2016] 1 LNS(A) xcix



MALAYSIA

---

MUST A REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS BE MADE A PARTY?*

TEO EU JINN

IN THIS ARTICLE, TEO EU JINN LOOKS AT WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS ("REGISTRAR") MUST BE MADE A PARTY IN EXPUNGEMENT AND RECTIFICATION PROCEEDINGS

Introduction

"Is it mandatory or necessary to cite or make the Registrar of Trade Marks as a party in expungement and rectification proceedings?" - this is an issue that has undergone much debate. One of the earlier cases on point is the case of LNS_2007_1_228Godrej Sara Lee Ltd v. Siah Teong Teck & Anor (Part 1).^[1] The Federal Court of Malaysia has recently shed some light on the issue by delineating the role and the position of the Registrar in expungement and rectification proceedings in the leading case of CLJ_2015_4_20Ho Tack Sien & Ors v. Rotta Research Laboratorium Spa & Anor; Registrar of Trade Marks (Intervener) & Another Appeal.^[2]

Decision of the High Court

The Respondent, being the registered proprietor of the trade mark "Viartril-S", brought an action of infringement and passing-off against the Appellants in the High Court of Kuala Lumpur to expunge the trade mark "Atril-250" registered under the name of the third Appellant. The action was on the basis that "Atril-250" was similar or so closely resembling the Respondent's "Viartril-S" mark and was likely to cause confusion and deception. The High Court held in favour of the Respondent and ordered the "Atril-250" mark to be expunged.

. . .

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

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert