|
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 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MAHMAD BIDIN lwn. PP [2016] 2 CLJ 123 UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kanun Keseksaan – Seksyen 376 – Rogol – Mangsa berumur 14 tahun tiga bulan – Mangsa dirogol oleh pegawai polis (perayu) di balai polis – Perayu dihukum penjara 15 tahun dan lapan kali sebatan – Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman – Intipati kesalahan rogol – Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan – Sama ada terdapat keterangan menunjukkan perancangan dan persediaan perayu melakukan rogol – Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 8 PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan – Rayuan ke Mahkamah Tinggi – Alasan-alasan rayuan – Kes separuh didengar oleh Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen – Tingkah laku saksi-saksi terdahulu – Sama ada dicabar oleh perayu – Sama ada Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen kedua mempunyai kelebihan audio dan visual untuk melihat tingkah laku saksi utama – Sama ada peruntukan s. 261 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (KTJ) dipatuhi KETERANGAN: Keterangan sokongan – Rogol – Mangsa bawah umur – Sama ada keterangan mangsa memerlukan keterangan sokongan – Sama ada keterangan mangsa amat meyakinkan – Sama ada terdapat kelemahan keterangan sokongan kepada keterangan mangsa – Sama ada sabitan boleh dibuat tanpa keterangan sokongan – Laporan perubatan – Sama ada mengukuhkan kes pendakwaan – Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 133A KETERANGAN: Saksi – Kredibiliti – Kesalahan merogol – Kredibiliti mangsa sebagai saksi – Mangsa berumur 14 tahun tiga bulan ketika dirogol dan 17 tahun lima bulan semasa memberi keterangan – Sama ada mangsa saksi kompeten – Sama ada peruntukan s. 133A Akta Keterangan 1950 dipatuhi PP lwn. JAGANATHAN RAJOO [2015] 2 SMC 234 UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kanun Keseksaan - Seksyen 304 - Mematikan orang dengan salah - Sama ada tertuduh memukul si mati di bahagian kepala dengan topi keledar - Sama ada si mati meninggal dunia selepas beberapa hari - Sama ada perbuatan tertuduh menyebabkan kematian si mati - Keterangan pakar - Sama ada si mati dipukul oleh lebih daripada seorang - Akuan nazak si mati kepada isteri - Sama ada diambil kira - Laporan polis isteri si mati - Sama ada diterima masuk sebagai eksibit - Kegagalan isteri si mati memberi keterangan - Sama ada anggapan bertentangan dibangkitkan - Sama ada tertuduh dilepaskan dan dibebaskan - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 32(1)(a) KETERANGAN: Akuan nazak - Kebolehterimaan - Sama ada kenyataan si mati kepada isterinya menjurus ke arah punca kematian si mati - Sama ada relevan - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 32(1)(a) - Bandahala Undik v. PP 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 2 (Part 1) COURT OF APPEAL AmGeneral Insurance Bhd v. Iskandar Mohd Nuli Dr Noor Aini Haji Sa'ari v. Sa-Art Sae Lee & Anor Millennium Medicare Services v. Nagadevan Mahalingam PP v. Chukwurah Egboh PP v. Mohammadreza Aslanzad & Anor And Another Appeal HIGH COURT Chitra Claire Pillai Joseph Sandra lwn. Noel John Bernatt Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd v. MTD ACPI Engineering Bhd & Anor Mahmad Bidin lwn. PP Majlis Agama Islam Negeri Pulau Pinang v. Abdul Latiff Hassan (As Administrator Of Estates Of Hj Mohammad Hj Abdul Rasid; Deceased) & Anor Shorubber (M) Sdn Bhd v. CIMB Bank Bhd SUBJECT INDEX BANKING Banker and customer - Duty of banker - Forgery - Honouring of forged cheques - Failure of bank to detect discrepancy of signature on forged cheques - Monies debited from customer's bank account - Recovery of monies debited - Whether bank wrongly debited monies from customer's account - Bills of Exchange Act 1949, ss. 24 & 73A - Civil Law Act 1956, s. 12 Cheques - Forgery - Bank honouring forged cheques - Failure of bank to detect discrepancy of signature on forged cheques - Monies debited from customer's bank account - Recovery of monies debited - Whether bank wrongly debited monies from customer's account - Whether customer knowingly or negligently contributed to forgery - Whether cheques honoured in good faith - Bills of Exchange Act 1949, ss. 24 & 73A CIVIL PROCEDURE Striking out - Application for - Writ and statement of claim - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19(1) - Land matter - Whether there were triable issues - Whether writ and statement of claim ought to be struck off CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Courts - Jurisdiction - Wakaf land - Whether civil court has jurisdiction to hear cases concerning wakaf land - Whether civil court trespassed into civil jurisdiction of Syariah Court - Whether civil court could grant reliefs to aggrieved party CONTRACT Construction contract - Sub-Contract - Whether first defendant entitled to claim payment for works done under Sub-Contract - Whether Sub-Contract between parties mutually terminated - Whether plaintiff had rights to retain monies from ex gratia payment which first defendant was entitled to - Whether retention of first defendant's entitlement justified Construction contract - Third party claims - Government repudiated main contract - Claim by third parties for work done - Plaintiff incorporated first defendant's claim in toto - Whether payment due to first defendant - Whether Sub-Contract between plaintiff and first defendant mutually terminated - Whether first defendant sufficiently remunerated for all works done - Whether plaintiff enriched when receiving and retaining payment granted by Government in consideration of first defendant's work done - Whether first defendant entitled to compensation Restraint of trade - Agreement - Clauses in partnership agreement - Restrictive covenants - Medical practitioners - Defendant prohibited from setting up same nature of business within 15 kilometres radius of plaintiff's branches - Whether clause in partnership agreement contravened s. 28 Contracts Act 1950 - Whether void and unenforceable - Whether clause falls under exception 2 of s. 28 Contracts Act 1950 - Dissolution of partnership - Whether agreement made upon or in anticipation of dissolution of partnership - Whether there was specific clause dealing with dissolution of partnership - Whether claim sustainable CRIMINAL LAW Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in 290.7g methamphetamine - Accused arrested at Kuala Lumpur International Airport - Capsules containing drugs found in accused's stomach - Whether accused committed crime under duress - Whether accused had knowledge of contents in capsules - Conduct of accused - Whether did not show innocence - Appellant did not pass through immigration check point - Whether element of trafficking negated - Whether any crime committed on Malaysian soil - Penal Code, s. 94 - Immigration Act 1959/63, s. 2 Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in 2,847.7g methamphetamine - Appeal against - Drugs found in apartment - Whether accused had access to apartment - Care and management of apartment - Whether presumption of occupier under s. 37(b) could be invoked - Whether trial judge considered cautioned statement - Whether trial judge breached rule against double presumption - Whether DNA found in apartment belonged to accused persons - Whether nexus between accused and drugs established - Whether trafficking proved under s. 37(d) or s. 2 - Failure of trial judge to make specific finding - Whether a misdirection - Whether evidence of chemist admissible - Exclusive power to deal with drugs - Whether accused had custody, control and knowledge of drugs - Element of possession - Whether proved - Criminal Procedure Code, ss. 182A, 402B(2) - PP v. Denish Madhavan EVIDENCE Expert evidence - Chemist report - Whether contained declaration as required under s. 402B(2) Criminal Procedure Code - Oral testimony of chemist - Whether admissible INSURANCE Motor insurance - Policy - Passenger liability - Action for negligence instituted in Singapore - Whether insurer liable to satisfy judgment entered by Malaysian passenger injured in road traffic accident in Singapore - Whether insurer waived right to deny liability on policy - Whether insurer's liability arose under special agreement entered between Malaysian insurers and Motor Insurers Bureau Singapore - Whether exclusion of third party coverage for passengers preserved - Whether insurer entitled to claim indemnity LAND LAW Wakaf land - Validity of - Claim on wakaf land - Rightful owner - Indefeasibility of title accorded by s. 340(3)(b) of the National Land Code - Whether applied to wakaf land - Whether civil courts has jurisdiction to hear cases concerning wakaf land - Whether civil court trespassed into civil jurisdiction of Syariah Court LIMITATION Land - Recovery of - Claim on wakaf land - Allegation that wakaf created 100 years ago - Whether action statute-barred TORT Negligence - Contributory negligence - Banker and customer - Duty of customer - Forged cheque, honouring of - Monies debited from customer's bank account - Recovery of monies debited - Whether bank wrongly debited monies from customer's account - Failure to notify bank of non-receipt of monthly statements - Whether customer knowingly or negligently contributed to forgery Negligence - Medical negligence - High risk pregnancy - Monochorionic pregnancy - Condition where twins share common placenta - Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome - Obstetrician and gynaecologist opted for conservative management approach in light of patient's situation - One twin died while surviving twin subsequently diagnosed with cerebral palsy - Whether there was breach of duty of care - Whether medical negligence established - Whether there was causal link that negligence by medical practitioner caused cerebral palsy to surviving twin WORDS & PHRASES Insurance - Insurance policy - Terms - "You, your, yourself, policy holder and insured" - Meaning - Whether referring to insured or any other person insured under the policy INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Keterangan sokongan - Rogol - Mangsa bawah umur - Sama ada keterangan mangsa memerlukan keterangan sokongan - Sama ada keterangan mangsa amat meyakinkan - Sama ada terdapat kelemahan keterangan sokongan kepada keterangan mangsa - Sama ada sabitan boleh dibuat tanpa keterangan sokongan - Laporan perubatan - Sama ada mengukuhkan kes pendakwaan - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 133A Saksi - Kredibiliti - Kesalahan merogol - Kredibiliti mangsa sebagai saksi - Mangsa berumur 14 tahun tiga bulan ketika dirogol dan 17 tahun lima bulan semasa memberi keterangan - Sama ada mangsa saksi kompeten - Sama ada peruntukan s. 133A Akta Keterangan 1950 dipatuhi PROSEDUR JENAYAH Rayuan - Rayuan ke Mahkamah Tinggi - Alasan-alasan rayuan - Kes separuh didengar oleh Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen - Tingkah laku saksi-saksi terdahulu - Sama ada dicabar oleh perayu - Sama ada Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen kedua mempunyai kelebihan audio dan visual untuk melihat tingkah laku saksi utama - Sama ada peruntukan s. 261 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (KTJ) dipatuhi UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH Kanun Keseksaan - Seksyen 376 - Rogol - Mangsa berumur 14 tahun tiga bulan - Mangsa dirogol oleh pegawai polis (perayu) di balai polis - Perayu dihukum penjara 15 tahun dan lapan kali sebatan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Intipati kesalahan rogol - Sama ada berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada terdapat keterangan menunjukkan perancangan dan persediaan perayu melakukan rogol - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 8 UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA Perceraian - Pembahagian harta perkahwinan - Hartanah merupakan aset tunggal di Malaysia - Pembahagian sekata harta perkahwinan - Kegagalan defendan untuk bekerjasama - Permohonan bagi hasil jualan harta perkahwinan dibahagi sama rata - Sama ada hartanah adalah harta amanah Perceraian - Prosiding-prosiding perceraian di United Kingdom (UK) - Bermastautin di UK - 'Certificate of entitlement to a decree' - Permohonan melalui Surat Kuasa Wakil - Pengikraran afidavit sokongan - Pemegang kuasa wakil berdaftar - Melakukan semua perkara atas nama plaintif - Sama ada merangkumi aspek berkaitan obligasi dan liabiliti - Sama ada permohonan tidak bernilai dan harus diketepikan UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH Perintah jualan - Permohonan - Harta perkahwinan - Permohonan hartanah dijual dan dipindah milik - Akta Mahkamah Kehakiman 1964, s. 3 - Sama ada permohonan 'cause or matter relating to land' - Cadangan bagi defendan membeli bahagian kepunyaan plaintif - Cadangan untuk menjual hartanah pada kadar nilai pasaran - Sama ada mahkamah mempunyai bidang kuasa - Akta Mahkamah Kehakiman, s. 25(i) - Kanun Tanah Negara, s. 145 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ARTICLES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LNS Article(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert Updated
Revoked
|
