|
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 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PP v. SHALIMA BI [2016] 2 CLJ 231 CRIMINAL LAW: Murder - Defence - Insanity - Accused poured hot oil on deceased - Deceased died due to multi organ failure resulting from major burns - Plea of insanity - Borderline personality disorder - Whether legal or medical insanity - Whether defence probable - Whether accused had motive to commit act against deceased - Whether accused had proved defence of insanity during commission of act - Penal Code, ss. 84 & 302 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against discharge and acquittal - Murder - Defence of insanity - Borderline personality disorder - Whether legal or medical insanity - Trial judge gave considerable weight to expert evidence in acquitting and discharging accused - Whether accused successfully proved legally insanity on balance of probabilities - Penal Code, ss. 84 & 302 EVIDENCE: Weight - Testimony of expert - Conflict between evidence of witness of fact and witness of opinion - Murder - Defence of insanity - Eyewitness testified that deceased was covered with oil and blood and accused had threatened to kill deceased's children - Expert witness testified that accused suffered from borderline personality disorder - Trial judge gave considerable weight to expert evidence in acquitting and discharging accused - Whether trial judge tested expert evidence against circumstantial evidence - Whether evidence of witness of fact must be given more weight PP lwn. TAY BOON KEAT [2015] 2 SMC 286 UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Akta Antipemerdagangan Orang dan Antipenyeludupan Migran 2007 - Seksyen 12 - Aktiviti pemerdagangan orang bagi maksud eksploitasi - Sama ada dibuktikan - Mangsa dibawa masuk ke Malaysia untuk bekerja sebagai pembantu rumah - Sama ada mangsa dipaksa untuk kerja dengan tertuduh - Sama ada kedatangan mangsa ke Malaysia adalah secara sukarela - Sama ada mangsa diculik atau diseludup dari Negara asalnya - Sama ada perjanjian sah dimasuki di antara tertuduh dan mangsa - Sama ada terdapat sekatan fizikal terhadap mangsa - Sama ada mangsa bebas untuk melarikan diri - Sama ada satu kes prima facie berjaya dibuktikan - Soo Ah Lai & Ors lwn. 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 2) COURT OF APPEAL Arumugam v. PP Mohd Azmi Robert Abdullah v. PP Munesuaran Ramasamy lwn. PP PP v. Leila Fatemi & Anor PP v. Shalima Bi Ugonna Philip Nwankwo v. PP Zaruna Yusoff lwn. PP HIGH COURT Charles Koo Ho-Tung & Ors v. Koo Lin Shen & Ors ISM Sdn Bhd v. Queensway Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn Bhd & Ors Malayan Banking Berhad v. Hong San Frozen Foods Sdn Bhd Mohd Sobri Che Hassan v. Pihak Berkuasa Tatatertib Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai & Anor Muhammad Azhar Mohamad Arsad & Anor v. Manzor Hussain Shah Wilayat Shah (Suing As Administrator Of The Estate Of Shah Farin Manzor Hussain Shah, Deceased) PP lwn. Wong Chee Seong SUBJECT INDEX ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Judicial review - Municipal officer - Transfer to different department - Issue of transfer brought to attention of State Assemblyman - Whether amounted to breach of discipline - Whether dismissal appropriate - Whether in accordance with Public Officers Regulations (Conduct and Discipline) Rules 1995 - Whether applicant given reasonable opportunity to be heard - Whether respondents guilty of bias - Local Government Act 1976, s. 16(4) - Federal Constitution, art. 135(2) CIVIL PROCEDURE Affidavits - Cross-examination of deponents - Application for - Whether made in good faith - Whether applicants estopped from proceeding with application - Whether there was excessive delay in filing application - Mandatory duty to file interlocutory applications expeditiously during pre-trial case management - Whether breached - Whether court could exercise judicial discretion to grant application - Rules of Court 2012, O. 28 r. 4(2), O. 34 r. 9(1) & (2), O. 59 r. 7(1) Mode of commencement - Originating summons - Application to convert originating summons to writ action - Nature of case involved conflicting and disputed facts - Whether insufficient to merely rely on affidavits - Allegations premised on oral evidence as opposed to documentary evidence - Whether appropriate for matter to be heard as writ action - Whether application for conversion premature - Whether conversion could be done and ordered by court at any stage of proceedings - Rules of Court 2012, CONTRACT Specific performance - Contract of service - Dismissal - Reinstatement - Whether applicant could resort to provisions of Industrial Relations Act 1967 - Whether applicant could claim for reinstatement - Whether court could order specific performance of contract of personal service - Whether applicant could only claim for damages - Specific Relief Act 1950, s. 20(1)(b) CRIMINAL LAW Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Trafficking in dangerous drugs - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Presumption of knowledge and trafficking - Section 37(d) and 37(da) - Failure by trial judge to determine which presumption relied upon - Whether amounted to misdirection - Whether appellant rebutted presumption - Whether defence sufficiently considered - Whether conviction and sentence safe Murder - Appeal - Whether factum of shooting and that accused was shooter established - Whether deceased died from gunshot wound - Whether accused had mens rea to commit murder - Whether trial judge judicially considered evidence of burnt mark on palm of deceased - Whether indicated defence wound - Whether there was intention to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause death - Whether falling under exceptions to murder - Whether guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s. 304(a) of Penal Code Murder - Defence - Insanity - Accused poured hot oil on deceased - Deceased died due to multi organ failure resulting from major burns - Plea of insanity - Borderline personality disorder - Whether legal or medical insanity - Whether defence probable - Whether accused had motive to commit act against deceased - Whether accused had proved defence of insanity during commission of act - Penal Code, ss. 84 & 302 Murder - Motive - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Accused quarrelled with deceased and hit deceased with piece of wood - DNA profile of deceased detected on alleged murder weapon and jeans worn by accused - Whether there was sufficient evidence to link accused to murder weapon - Whether motive relevant - Whether accused had motive to kill deceased - Whether circumstantial evidence pointed to culpability of accused - Penal Code, s. 302 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Dangerous drugs - Trafficking - Presumption of knowledge and trafficking - Sections 37(d) and 37 (da) DDA 1952 - Failure by trial judge to determine which presumption relied upon - Whether conviction and sentence safe Appeal - Appeal against discharge and acquittal - Murder - Defence of insanity - Borderline personality disorder - Whether legal or medical insanity - Trial judge gave considerable weight to expert evidence in acquitting and discharging accused - Whether accused successfully proved legally insanity on balance of probabilities - Penal Code, ss. 84 & 302 Appeal - Sentence, against - Appeal by prosecution - Accused persons originally charged with offence of drug trafficking - Offence reduced to custody or control of drugs - Sentence of eight years imprisonment - Whether accused persons ought to be convicted on original charge and sentenced to death - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 12(2), 37(da), 39B(1) Charge - Reduction of - Accused charged for murder under s. 302 of Penal Code - Accused quarrelled with deceased and hit deceased with piece of wood - Defence of denial - Whether accused had motive to kill deceased - Appeal to reduce original charge of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Nature of injuries sustained by deceased - Whether showing intention to cause serious bodily injury to deceased - Whether death was probable result - Penal Code, ss. 302, 304(a) Charge - Reduction of - Accused persons originally charged with offence of drug trafficking - Offence reduced to custody or control of drugs - Whether justified - Whether supported by evidence - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 12(2), 37(da), 39B(1) EVIDENCE Circumstantial evidence - Murder - Accused quarrelled with deceased and hit deceased with piece of wood - Incident witnessed by eyewitness - Forensic evidence that deceased was hit with blunt object - DNA profile of deceased detected on alleged murder weapon and jeans worn by accused - Whether there was sufficient evidence to link accused to murder weapon - Nature of injuries sustained by deceased - Whether showing intention to cause serious bodily injury to deceased - Whether circumstantial evidence pointed to culpability of accused Weight - Testimony of expert - Conflict between evidence of witness of fact and witness of opinion - Murder - Defence of insanity - Eyewitness testified that deceased was covered with oil and blood and accused had threatened to kill deceased's children - Expert witness testified that accused suffered from borderline personality disorder - Trial judge gave considerable weight to expert evidence in acquitting and discharging accused - Whether trial judge tested expert evidence against circumstantial evidence - Whether evidence of witness of fact must be given more weight Witness - Eyewitness - Credibility - Accused charged for offence of murder - Accused quarrelled with deceased and hit deceased with piece of wood - Eyewitness testified that deceased sustained injuries after falling down three times - Eyewitness changed testimony after refreshing memory - Whether eyewitness trustworthy and credible LAND LAW Charge - Order for sale - Lands charged to bank as security for loan - Default in repayment of loan - Opposition to application for order for sale - Whether cause to contrary shown - National Land Code, s. 256 TORT Damages - Quantum - Road accident - Liability apportioned at 90% against appellants - Respondent awarded general damages of RM20,000 and special damages of RM100 - Whether award of damages excessive - Whether there was failure to take into consideration deceased passed away seven months after accident - Whether quantum of award should be reduced INDEKS PERKARA KETERANGAN Anggapan bertentangan - Kegagalan memanggil saksi material - Sama ada hak memanggil saksi terletak pada budi bicara pendakwaan - Sama ada kegagalan memanggil saksi material menjejaskan kes pendakwaan - Akta Keterangan 1950, s. 114(g) Keterangan dokumentar - Pemalsuan dokumen - Pemalsuan surat wasiat - Pindahan wang simpanan dan pindah milik tanah si mati kepada tertuduh - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 457 - Sama ada tandatangan dalam wasiat sama dengan spesimen tandatangan si mati - Sama ada keterangan saksi pakar tulisan tangan berjaya membuktikan tandatangan dalam surat wasiat dipalsukan PROSEDUR JENAYAH Pertuduhan - Pertuduhan cacat - Tertuduh dipertuduh dengan dua pertuduhan memalsukan dokumen - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 457 - Pemalsuan surat wasiat - Pertuduhan bertindih - Pertuduhan pertama dan kedua merujuk satu dokumen sama - Sama ada pemalsuan boleh dilakukan dua kali terhadap satu dokumen sama - Sama ada pertuduhan kedua sah - Sama ada kecacatan pada pertuduhan berbentuk teknikal - Sama ada boleh dipulihkan sebagai ketidakaturan Saksi - Kebolehpercayaan - Kenyataan saksi kepada polis bercanggah dengan keterangan di mahkamah - Sama ada keterangan saksi boleh dicabar oleh pendakwaan - Sama ada keterangan saksi kekal sebagai keterangan pendakwaan - Sama ada keterangan memihak dan selari dengan pembelaan tertuduh UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 39B(1)(a) - Mengedar heroin - Tertuduh ditangkap ketika membawa beg berisi heroin seberat 54.72g - Tertuduh tidak melawan semasa ditangkap - Anggapan pengedaran - Sama ada diguna pakai dengan betul - Sama ada kes prima facie dibuktikan - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan mengenai dadah di dalam beg - Sama ada tertuduh hanya mempunyai pemilikan pasif - Sama ada hakim bicara membuat penemuan milikan di akhir kes pendakwaan sebelum mengguna pakai anggapan pengedaran - Sama ada fakta kes menunjukkan kesalahan milikan dan bukan pengedaran - Sama ada sabitan dan hukuman selamat - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952, s. 12(2) Kanun Keseksaan - Seksyen 302 - Perayu dituduh membunuh anak-anaknya dengan melemaskan mereka - Rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman - Keterangan ikut keadaan - Sama ada hakim bicara mempertimbangkan keterangan yang dikemukakan - Sama ada keterangan membawa kepada hanya satu kesimpulan iaitu kebersalahan perayu - Sama ada hakim bicara mempertimbangkan keterangan-keterangan lain yang memihak kepada perayu - Hubungan perayu dengan mangsa-mangsa - Sama ada dipertimbangkan - Sama ada keterangan saksi pendakwaan selari dengan kenyataan yang dirakam polis - Sama ada dua versi keterangan yang berlainan - Sama ada sabitan perayu selamat Pemalsuan - Pemalsuan dokumen - Pemalsuan surat wasiat - Pindahan wang simpanan dan pindah milik tanah si mati kepada tertuduh - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 457 - Sama ada tandatangan dalam wasiat sama dengan spesimen tandatangan si mati - Sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan intipati pertuduhan - Sama ada keterangan mencukupi - Sama ada kes prima facie berjaya dibuktikan |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ARTICLES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LNS Article(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert Updated
Revoked
|
