Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #29/2019 18 July 2019

New This Week Case(s) of the Week PP v. DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABD RAZAK [2019] 6 CLJ 561 WARIS SELESA SDN BHD v. TRADELIFT INDOPALM INDUSTRIES SDN BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL [2019] 6 CLJ 816 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2019 Volume 6 (Part 5) CLJ 2019 Volume 6 (Part 6) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

PP v. DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABD RAZAK [2019] 6 CLJ 561
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
RICHARD MALANJUM CJ, ZAHARAH IBRAHIM CJ (MALAYA), DAVID WONG DAK WAH CJ (SABAH & SARAWAK), RAMLY ALI FCJ, ROHANA YUSUF FCJ, MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ, TENGKU MAIMUN TUAN MAT FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05(L)-(72-74)-03-2019(W)]
10 APRIL 2019

CRIMINAL LAW: Charges - Criminal charges - Proceedings - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Court of Appeal granted order of stay of criminal proceedings - Whether decision of Court of Appeal correct

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Stay of execution pending appeals - Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Court of Appeal granted order of stay of criminal proceedings - Commencement of trial against applicant at High Court stopped pending disposal of appeals to Federal Court - Whether there were `proceeding pending' before Federal Court - Whether stay of criminal proceedings same as stay of civil proceedings - Whether there were exceptional circumstances justifying stay of proceedings - Whether Court of Appeal correct in allowing applicant's application for stay of criminal proceedings - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 44, 79 & 80

---

WARIS SELESA SDN BHD v.
TRADELIFT INDOPALM INDUSTRIES SDN BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL [2019] 6 CLJ 816
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
ROHANA YUSUF JCA, HARMINDAR SINGH DHALIWAL JCA, HANIPAH FARIKULLAH JCA
[CIVIL APPEALS NO: W-02(NCC)(A)-1657-08-2017 & W-02(IM)(NCC)-1103-06-2017]
07 JANUARY 2019

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction – High Court – Company wound up by High Court Sabah and Sarawak (‘HCSS’) – Party commenced originating summons at High Court of Malaya (‘HCM’) – Whether HCM had jurisdiction to hear matter – Whether action ought to be instituted at HCSS – Where cause of action accrued – Whether ‘place of residence or business’ could extend to liquidator of wound up company – Federal Constitution, art. 121 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 23(1)(a), (b) & (c)

COMPANY LAW: Winding-up – Restitution – Companies entered into management and tenancy agreements – Both companies later wound up and liquidators for each company appointed – Tenancy and management agreements terminated – Forfeiture of deposits and rentals – Whether made after presentation of winding-up petition – Whether disposition within s. 223 of Companies Act 1965 – Whether there was application for validation order – Whether remittance of sum after presentation of petition of winding-up valid

---

1. Sanjay Singh Chauhan v. PP [2019] 1 LNS 206 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PP v. Sanjay Singh Chauhan [2017] 1 LNS 424

2. PP v. Richard Joseph [2019] 1 LNS 205 (CA) varying the High Court case of PP v. Richard Joseph [2018] 1 LNS 108

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 156	NAUTICAL SUPREME SDN BHD v. JAYA SUDHIR JAYARAM CIVIL PROCEDURE: Action - Consolidation of actions - Cross-action - Existence of additional party - Whether application for consolidation an indirect attempt to improve pleadings - Whether there was cross action by parties - Whether a cross action could be consolidated For the plaintiff - Su Tiang Joo, Teh Eng Lay, Pang Kong Leng & Nicholas Teh; M/s Cheah Teh & Su For the defendant - Robert Low, Jimmy Chong & Karen Yong; M/s Ranjit Ooi & Robert Low
[2018] 1 LNS 421	RITA KRISDIANTI v. PP CRIMINAL LAW: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - s. 39B - Trafficking - Identity of dangerous drugs - Drugs left by Customs Narcotic Unit Officer at the office to lodge report at police station - Drug exhibits left in temporary custody with another officer - Officer having temporary custody of drug exhibits not identified and not called as witness - Drug exhibits marked only after report was lodged - Length of time drug exhibits left in temporary custody of officer 20 to 30 minutes - Whether break in chain of evidence CRIMINAL LAW: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - s. 39B - Trafficking - Defence of innocent carrier - Allegation that real trafficker was another person - Whether the other person was real or fictitious - Whether that person was the real trafficker - Whether prosecution should have investigated that other person CRIMINAL LAW: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - s. 39B - Trafficking - Whether accused was in possession - Knowledge required to prove possession - Whether knowledge proved by inference of certain facts and circumstances - Whether conduct of accused showed knowledge - Accused looking shocked - Whether judge entitled to rely on conduct of accused to show knowledge - Evidence Act 1950, s. 8 EVIDENCE: Hearsay - Evidence given without calling witness - Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) test carried out by laboratory assistant of chemist - Laboratory assistant not called as a witness - Whether evidence of chemist amounts to hearsay - Whether evidence of chemist challenged in cross-examination - Evidence Act 1950, s. 60 For the appellant - Gooi Soon Seng & Chong Kok Sen; M/s Gooi & Azura For the respondent - Nurshafini Mustafha, Deputy Public Prosecutor; Attorney General's Chambers
[2018] 1 LNS 452	MOK SHIAU PING v. PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN ZEHN BUKIT PANTAI LAND LAW: Delivery of vacant possession - Whether there was delivery of vacant possession - Contractual stipulation that delivery of vacant possession should be supported by certificate signed by vendor's architect and letter from appropriate authority - Whether letter from developer indicated delivery of vacant possession - Whether defendant received letter from developer LAND LAW: Management corporation - Service charges - Recovery of unpaid service charges - Whether Management Corporation entitled to recover unpaid service charges - Whether payment made by defendant was made under protest - Whether payment was made 'strictly without admission of liability and on a without prejudice basis and paid under protest' - Strata Titles Act 1985, ss. 39, 43 - Strata Management Act 2013, s. 59 For the appellant - TH Tan & Goh Sze Huat; M/s Tai Hwa & Co For the respondent - Toh Chia Hua & Lim Shan Yi; M/s Azman Davidson & Co
[2018] 1 LNS 177	KOMALA MUTHUSAMY lwn. MEGANATHAN MUNIANDY UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Perceraian - Pembubaran - Pempetisyen isteri tidak tertahan dengan tindak tanduk responden suami - Suami menggunakan isteri untuk kepentingan peribadi dan kewangan semata-mata - Perlakuan kasar suami - Ketiadaan perasaan kasih sayang - Sama ada ikatan perkahwinan mestilah didasarkan dengan kerelaan bersama - Sama ada terdapat kemungkinan bahtera perkahwinan akan kembali aman bahagia - Sama ada pihak-pihak akan beroleh kedamaian jika perkahwinan dibubarkan - Sama ada perkahwinan kedua-dua pihak dapat diselamatkan UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Penjagaan - Hak penjagaan - Kebajikan anak - Pempetisyen isteri membawa anak tinggal bersama di rumah ibu bapanya - Anak berumur di bawah 7 tahun - Anak menjalani kehidupan stabil dengan pempetisyen isteri - Sama ada penjagaan dan kawalan anak harus diberi kepada ibu kandung anak - Sama ada hak penjagaan dan kawalan wajar diberikan kepada pempetisyen isteri dengan akses oleh responden suami UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Anak - Nafkah - Sama ada pempetisyen isteri wajar menanggung kesemua perbelanjaan anak - Sama ada belanja yang tinggi diperlukan untuk membesarkan anak UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Nafkah - Nafkah diri - Kaedah pembayaran nafkah - Tuntutan untuk jumlah pukal - Sama ada jumlah pukal boleh dibuat dengan persetujuan pihak-pihak tertakluk kepada kebenaran mahkamah - Sama ada mahkamah boleh mengarahkan bayaran berkala yang diperintahkan dicagar UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Aset perkahwinan - Pembahagian - Rumah dibeli oleh pempetisyen isteri dengan pinjaman kerajaan - Bayaran balik dibuat melalui potongan gaji pempetisyen isteri - Sama ada rumah matrimonial terjatuh di bawah kategori s. 76(3) Akta Memperbaharui Undang-Undang (Perkahwinan Dan Perceraian) 1976 Bagi pihak pempetisyen - T Selvadoray; T/n T Selva & Co Bagi pihak responden - RSN Rayer; T/n R Nethaji Rayer & Co
[2018] 1 LNS 179	MOHD JOHAIZAN MAN lwn. PP PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan - Rayuan oleh tertuduh yang telah mengaku salah - Sama ada tertuduh yang telah mengaku salah dihalang daripada merayu terhadap sabitan - Sama ada Mahkamah boleh menggunakan budibicara semakan untuk campurtangan terhadap sabitan - Sama ada terdapat sebarang ketidakpatuhan undang-undang oleh hakim bicara dalam merekodkan sabitan - Kanun Acara Jenayah, s. 305 PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Petisyen rayuan - Prinsip dan prosedur - Butiran mengenai perkara undang-undang dan fakta di mana hakim bicara dikatakan telah terkhilaf tidak dinyatakan di dalam petisyen rayuan - Sama ada ketinggalan boleh dimaafkan - Sama ada ketinggalan telah memprejudiskkan responden - Kanun Acara Jenayah, s. 307 PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Hukuman penjara 8 tahun dan 4 sebatan bagi kesalahan rompakan bersenjata - Sama ada hukuman adalah sangat berlebihan - Sama ada hakim bicara telah memilih prinsip yang betul dengan memberikan keutamaan kepada kepentingan awam Bagi pihak perayu - Loges Tayagarajan; T/n Kit & Associates Bagi pihak responden - Safiyatun Ahmadon, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya

 

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 6 (Part 5)

FEDERAL COURT

PP v. Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abd Razak
Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat FCJJ
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Charges - Criminal charges - Proceedings) [2019] 6 CLJ 561 [FC]

• For the appellant - Tommy Thomas, Sithambaram Vairavan, Manoj Kurup, Donald Joseph Franklin & Izzat Fauzan; DPPs
• For the respondent - Harvinderjit Singh, Farhan Read, Wan Aizuddin Wan Mohamed, Rahmat Hazlan, Farhan Shafee & Shahirah Hanapiah; M/s Shafee & Co 

COURT OF APPEAL

Huawei Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Maxbury Communications Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Nallini Pathmanathan, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA
(Arbitration - Award - Setting aside - Appeal against) [2019] 6 CLJ 588 [CA]

• For the appellant - KF Eee; M/s KF Ee & Co
• For the respondent - Lee Chan Leong & Siew Ee Mei; M/s Chan Leong & Co
• Amicus curiae - Nahendran Navaratnam, R Jayasingam & Wong Wye Wah; M/s Navaratnam Chambers 

Pembinaan Jaya Zira Sdn Bhd v. MP Bersatu Mega Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Rhodzariah Bujang JJCA
(Contract - Assignment - Consent - Development agreement between Putrajaya Holdings and developer) [2019] 6 CLJ 607 [CA]

• (Appeal No: B-02(NCC)(A)-1679-08-2017)
• For the appellant - Abu Aziz; M/s Amelda Fuad Abi & Aidil
• For the respondent - Shobah Veera, Samarudin Rejab, Vinod Sharma & N Rajentharan; M/s Hakem Arabi & Assocs
• (Appeal No: B-02(IM)-191-01-2018)
• For the appellant - Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Khoo Suk Chyi, Amelda Md Din, K Selva Kumaran & Abu Haziq Abu Talib; M/s Malik Imtiaz Sarwar
• For the respondent - Shobah Veera, Samarudin Rejab, Vinod Sharma & N Rajentharan; M/s Hakem Arabi & Assocs 

HIGH COURT

Competition Commission v. Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors
Nordin Hassan J
(Administrative Law; Competition Law; Jurisdiction - Judicial review - Decision of Competition Appeal Tribunal - Application by Competition Commission) [2019] 6 CLJ 623 [HC]

• For the applicant - Lim Chee Wee, Sharon Wong, Manshan Singh, Karen Chai & Dharliza Dris; M/s Skrine
• For the 2nd respondent - Logan Sabapathy & Camelia Cheong; M/s Logan Sabapathy
• For the 3rd respondent - Tay Beng Chai, Leonard Yeoh, Wong Weng Yew, Nicole Leong & Angie Ng; M/s Tay & Partners 

Critical System Specialist Sdn Bhd v. CLLS Power System Sdn Bhd
Azizul Azmi Adnan J
(Contract - Damages - Liquidated damages - Contractor appointed to carry out works for project) [2019] 6 CLJ 658 [HC]

• For the plaintiff - Wilson Lim & Yeap Poay Nee; M/s Teoh Pek Wei
• For the defendant - Conrad Young, PL Leong & Tan Shang Neng; M/s Sreenevasan Young 

Jinko Solar Technology Sdn Bhd v. Oceantrax Engineering Sdn Bhd
Hadhariah Syed Ismail J
(Civil Procedure - Injunction - Interlocutory injunction - Application for) [2019] 6 CLJ 676 [HC]

• For the plaintiff - YC Wong & Chin Chon Yen; M/s KN Lee & Assocs
• For the defendant - Nicholas Tan & Khoo Mei Yin; M/s Lim Huck Aik & Co 

PP lwn. Mohd Jairulnizam Mohd Nordin & Satu Lagi Kes
Asmadi Hussin PK
(Undang-undang Jenayah - Akta Senjata Api (Penalti Lebih Berat) 1971 - Berdagang senjata api - Menjual senapang patah milik RELA) [2019] 6 CLJ 681 [HC]

• Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Safiyatun Ahmadon; TPR
• Bagi pihak tertuduh - Ramkarpal Singh Karpal Singh; T/n Karpal Singh & Co 

SUBJECT INDEX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Judicial review - Decision of Competition Appeal Tribunal - Application by Competition Commission ('Commission') - Whether Commission had real and genuine interest in subject matter - Whether Commission adversely affected by decision of Tribunal - Whether Commission clothed with locus standi to apply for judicial review - Whether decision tainted, with error of law, irrationality, unreasonableness or procedural impropriety - Whether decision of Tribunal amenable to judicial review - Competition Act 2010, s. 4(2)
Competition Commission v. Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors
(Nordin Hassan J) [2019] 6 CLJ 623 [HC]

ARBITRATION

Award - Setting aside - Appeal against - Whether award dealt with dispute not contemplated by or not falling within terms of submission to arbitration within meaning of s. 37(1)(a)(iv) of the Arbitration Act 2005 - Whether liable to be set aside - Whether case fell within purview of s. 37(3) of Arbitration Act 2005 - Whether decision making process of arbitrator could be faulted - Whether there arose 'a new difference' or 'a dispute not contemplated within terms of submission to arbitration' - Whether there was factual basis for complaint under s. 37(2)(b) of Arbitration Act 2005 - Whether there was breach of justice - Whether intervention of court warranted
Huawei Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Maxbury Communications Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Nallini Pathmanathan, Zabariah Mohd Yusof JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 588 [CA]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Injunction - Interlocutory injunction - Application for - Application to restrain petitioner from proceeding with winding up petition or advertising winding up petition of company - Whether there were substantial disputes against petitioner's claims - Whether petitioner bona fide petitioner - Whether petitioner could be restrained by injunction from advertising winding up petition - Whether law of injunction in Keet Gerald Francis's case applicable - Whether balance of convenience lay in granting injunction
Jinko Solar Technology Sdn Bhd v. Oceantrax Engineering Sdn Bhd
(Hadhariah Syed Ismail J) [2019] 6 CLJ 676 [HC]

COMPETITION LAW

Anti-competition practices - Anti-competition agreement - Collaboration agreement between MAS and AirAsia - Whether agreement an infringement of s. 4(1) of Competition Act 2010 - Whether agreement has effect of significantly preventing, restricting or distorting competition in airlines services - Whether had anti-competitive object - Whether deeming provision under s. 4(2)(b) applicable
Competition Commission v. Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors
(Nordin Hassan J) [2019] 6 CLJ 623 [HC]

CONTRACT

Assignment - Consent - Development agreement between Putrajaya Holdings and developer - Subsequent assignment of all obligations under development agreement by developer to plaintiff - Whether consent of Putrajaya Holdings material - Whether novation agreement between Putrajaya Holdings, developer and plaintiff override deed of assignment - Whether deed of assignment valid
Pembinaan Jaya Zira Sdn Bhd v. MP Bersatu Mega Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Rhodzariah Bujang JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 607 [CA]

Damages - Liquidated damages - Contractor appointed to carry out works for project - Clause in main contract provided that contractor liable to pay liquidated damages if works not completed by required completion date - Contractor entered into contract with subcontractor for purchase of generators - Generators failed testings and caused delay in completion of project - Contractor imposed with liquidated damages under main contract - Whether contractor could claim for liquidated damages paid for from subcontractor - Whether subcontractor aware of clause on liquidated damages in main contract - Contracts Act 1950, s. 74
Critical System Specialist Sdn Bhd v. CLLS Power System Sdn Bhd
(Azizul Azmi Adnan J) [2019] 6 CLJ 658 [HC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Charges - Criminal charges - Proceedings - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Court of Appeal granted order of stay of criminal proceedings - Whether decision of Court of Appeal correct
PP v. Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abd Razak
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat FCJJ) [2019] 6 CLJ 561 [FC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Stay of execution pending appeals - Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Court of Appeal granted order of stay of criminal proceedings - Commencement of trial against applicant at High Court stopped pending disposal of appeals to Federal Court - Whether there were 'proceeding pending' before Federal Court - Whether stay of criminal proceedings same as stay of civil proceedings - Whether there were exceptional circumstances justifying stay of proceedings - Whether Court of Appeal correct in allowing applicant's application for stay of criminal proceedings - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 44, 79 & 80
PP v. Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abd Razak
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat FCJJ) [2019] 6 CLJ 561 [FC]

JURISDICTION

Courts - High Court - Application for judicial review against decision of Competition Appeal Tribunal - Whether Tribunal an administrative body merely exercising administrative functions and powers - Whether exclusive jurisdiction of Tribunal affects supervisory jurisdiction of High Court - Whether decision tainted, with error of law, irrationality, unreasonableness or procedural impropriety - Whether High Court could review Tribunal's decision - Whether decision of Tribunal amenable to judicial review
Competition Commission v. Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors
(Nordin Hassan J) [2019] 6 CLJ 623 [HC]

INDEKS PERKARA

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH

Akta Senjata Api (Penalti Lebih Berat) 1971 - Seksyen 2 & 7 - Berdagang senjata api - Menjual senapang patah milik RELA - Inti pati kesalahan - Kebolehgunaan senjata api - Senjata api tidak berupaya melepaskan tembakan tetapi boleh dibaik pulih - Sama ada 'unserviceable' - Sama ada masih 'senjata api' di sisi undang-undang - Ketiadaan nombor siri pada senjata api - Sama ada wujud kekeliruan tentang keempunyaan senjata api - Kes prima facie - Sama ada gagal dibuktikan - Sama ada tertuduh harus dilepas dan dibebaskan tanpa perlu membela diri - Akta Senjata 1960 ss. 6 & 9
PP lwn. Mohd Jairulnizam Mohd Nordin & Satu Lagi Kes
(Asmadi Hussin PK) [2019] 6 CLJ 681 [HC]

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 6 (Part 6)

COURT OF APPEAL

Chin Huat Yean & Anor v. Chin Jhin Thien & Anor
Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Abang Iskandar, Kamaludin Md Said JJCA
(Succession; Trusts - Secret trust - Whether court could strike out secret trust based on illegality or public policy) [2019] 6 CLJ 701 [CA]

• For the appellants - Lee Chooi Peng & Lin Pei Sin; M/s Justin Voon Chooi & Wing
• For the respondents - John Khoo Boo Lai; M/s Ong & Assocs 

Kwan Ngen Wah & Ors v. Hiew Kon Fah & Ors And Other Appeals
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Mary Lim, Yaacob Md Sam JJCA
(Land Law - Title - Fraud - Whether endorsements of transfer valid) [2019] 6 CLJ 722 [CA]

• (Civil Appeal No: S-01-742-12-2011)
• For the appellants - Cyrus Das, Baldev Singh & Kelvin Wong Kah Shing; M/s Baldev Gan & Assocs
• For the 1st and 2nd respondents - Saseedharan Menon & Edwin Tsen; M/s Tan Pang Tsen & Co
• For the 3rd respondent - Clement Chaim; M/s Fernandez & Co
• For the 4th & 5th respondents - Firoz Hussein, Hj Ansari Abdullah & Mohd Amirul Amin; M/s Ansari & Co
• For the 6th, 7th & 8th respondents - Zaleha Rose Pandin, Dayangku Fazidah Hatun Pg. Bagul; AG's Sabah
• (Civil Appeals No: S-02-3134-12-2011)
• For the appellants - Saseedharan Menon & Edwin Tsen; M/s Tan Pang Tsen & Co
                              - Firoz Hussein, Hj Ansari Abdullah & Mohd Amirul Amin; M/s Ansari & Co
• For the respondents - Cyrus Das, Baldev Singh & Kelvin Wong Kah Shing; M/s Baldev Gan & Assocs
• (Civil Appeal No: 02(IM)-3135-12-2011)
• For the appellants - Saseedharan Menon & Edwin Tsen; M/s Tan Pang Tsen & Co
• For the respondents - Cyrus Das, Baldev Singh & Kelvin Wong Kah Shing; M/s Baldev Gan & Assocs 

Muhamad Zafir Kamil v. PP & Another Appeal
Mohtarudin Baki, Rhodzariah Bujang, Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah JJCA
(Criminal Law - Trafficking in cannabis - Contradictory evidence on drug exhibits - Whether contradictions vitiated prosecution's case) [2019] 6 CLJ 761 [CA]

• (Criminal Appeal No: A-05(M)-199-04-2018)
• For the appellant - Ariff Azami Hussein; M/s Azizzul & Ariff
• For the respondent - Mohamed Faizal Mohamed Fedder, Muhammad Azmi Mashud, Ku Hayati Ku Haron; DPPs
• (Criminal Appeal No: A-05(M)-200-04-2018)
• For the appellant - Mohamad Hafiz Jalaludin, Mohd Fitri Asmuni & Mohamad Salihen Mastor; M/s Alif, Hafiz & Partners
• For the respondent - Mohamed Faizal Mohamed Fedder, Muhammad Azmi Mashud, Ku Hayati Ku Haron; DPPs 

Randhir Singh Bhajnik Singh v. Sunildave Singh Parmar (The Administrator Of The Estate Of K Surjit Kaur Gean Kartar Singh (Deceased))
Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA
(Debtors; Evidence - Usage of statutory declaration as document to recover loan - Whether contrary to Stamp Act 1949) [2019] 6 CLJ 771 [CA]

• For the appellant - PM Nagarajan Periasamy & Vinoshni Narayanasamy; M/s Nagarajan Peri & Co
• For the respondent - K Thavanesan & D Ramesh; M/s K Thava 

Sin Kheng Chuan & Anor v. Sin Kheng Hooi
Abang Iskandar, Badariah Sahamid, Mary Lim JJCA
(Trusts - Breach of fiduciary duties - Whether sole trustee appropriated entire proceeds of disposal of shares) [2019] 6 CLJ 782 [CA]

• For the appellant - SC Tan; M/s SC Tan
• For the respondent - Mura Raju & K Govindaraju; M/s G Raju & Co 

Tan Chin Hock & Ors v. Metro Laksana Properties Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
Abang Iskandar, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA
(Contract - Termination - Whether notice of termination issued by developer pursuant to agreed clauses in agreement) [2019] 6 CLJ 801 [CA]

• (Civil Appeal No: B-02(NCVC)(W)-2218-10-2017)
• For the appellant - Amarjeet Singh & Avtar Singh; M/s Zubeda & Amarjeet
• For the respondent - Lai Yee Fan, SY Lai & Ong Siew Ming; M/s SY Lai & Assocs
• (Civil Appeal No: B-02(NCVC)(W)-2219-10-2017)
• For the appellant - Lai Yee Fan, SY Lai & Ong Siew Ming; M/s SY Lai & Assocs
• For the respondent - Amarjeet Singh & Avtar Singh; M/s Zubeda & Amarjeet 

Waris Selesa Sdn Bhd v. Tradelift Indopalm Industries Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
Rohana Yusuf, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA
(Civil Procedure; Company Law - Jurisdiction - High Court) [2019] 6 CLJ 816 [CA]

• For the appellant - Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Surendra Ananth & Harleen Kaur; M/s Jeeva Partnership
• For the respondent - Michael Chow Keat, Simon Hong & Michelle Yoong; M/s Simon Hong 

HIGH COURT

Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia v. Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang
Wong Kian Kheong J
(Civil Procedure; Land Law - Land acquisition - Award) [2019] 6 CLJ 834 [HC]

• For the applicant - Shahman Sangaran; M/s Kumar Jaspal Quah & Aishah
• For the respondent - Etty Eliany Tesno; State Legal Advisor, Selangor 

Palmamide Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Rajendiran Manickam & Anor
SM Komathy Suppiah J
(Labour Law - Employment - Compensation - Claim for) [2019] 6 CLJ 843 [HC]

• For the appellants - Alvin Julian & Wong Hui Ling; M/s Zaid Ibrahim & Co
• For the respondents - Manoharan Tevadasin & Mathan Raj SC Subramanian; M/s Ong & Partners 

SUBJECT INDEX

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Jurisdiction - High Court - Company wound up by High Court Sabah and Sarawak ('HCSS') - Party commenced originating summons at High Court of Malaya ('HCM') - Whether HCM had jurisdiction to hear matter - Whether action ought to be instituted at HCSS - Where cause of action accrued - Whether 'place of residence or business' could extend to liquidator of wound up company - Federal Constitution, art. 121 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 23(1)(a), (b) & (c)
Waris Selesa Sdn Bhd v. Tradelift Indopalm Industries Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Rohana Yusuf, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 816 [CA]

Parties - Joinder - Land reference proceedings - Land owner withdrew application to intervene - Whether court could order joinder of land owner as co-respondent suo motu - Whether land owner 'person interested' under s. 2(1) read with s. 44(2) of Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Whether entitled to intervene - Whether affected by land reference - Whether joinder order would ensure finality in litigation - Rules of Court 2012, O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1(2), O. 15 r. 6(2)(b)(i) & (ii)
Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia v. Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang
(Wong Kian Kheong J) [2019] 6 CLJ 834 [HC]

COMPANY LAW

Winding-up - Restitution - Companies entered into management and tenancy agreements - Both companies later wound up and liquidators for each company appointed - Tenancy and management agreements terminated - Forfeiture of deposits and rentals - Whether made after presentation of winding-up petition - Whether disposition within s. 223 of Companies Act 1965 - Whether there was application for validation order - Whether remittance of sum after presentation of petition of winding-up valid
Waris Selesa Sdn Bhd v. Tradelift Indopalm Industries Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Rohana Yusuf, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 816 [CA]

CONTRACT

Termination - Validity - Joint venture agreement - Whether notice of termination issued by developer pursuant to agreed clauses in agreement - Whether notice of termination given out of time - Whether termination bad in law and in fact - Whether notice of termination invalid - Effect of - Whether developer entitled to refund of deposit
Tan Chin Hock & Ors v. Metro Laksana Properties Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Abang Iskandar, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 801 [CA]

CRIMINAL LAW

Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in cannabis - Allegation that accused persons were trafficking in cannabis wrapped in five slabs - Contradictory evidence on drug exhibits - Five slabs of cannabis examined and analysed by chemist - Photographs showed ten and not five slabs were seized by police - Nicks made by police on aluminium foil cover of slabs but chemist received 'nicely wrapped' slabs - Whether contradictions vitiated prosecution's case - Whether cannabis produced in court same cannabis seized from accused - Whether reasonable doubt raised on identity of drugs - Whether accused to be acquitted and discharged
Muhamad Zafir Kamil v. PP & Another Appeal
(Mohtarudin Baki, Rhodzariah Bujang, Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 761 [CA]

DEBTORS

Recovery of monies - Personal loan - Claim for repayment of loan - Statutory declaration of indebtedness - Administrator of deceased initiated legal proceeding against borrower by claiming certain amount as per statutory declaration - Usage of statutory declaration as document to recover loan - Whether contrary to Stamp Act 1949 - Whether ad valorem duty paid - Whether statutory declaration to seek repayment of loan in breach of general purpose of statutory declaration
Randhir Singh Bhajnik Singh v. Sunildave Singh Parmar (The Administrator Of The Estate Of K Surjit Kaur Gean Kartar Singh (Deceased))
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 771 [CA]

EVIDENCE

Admission - Statutory declaration of indebtedness - Judgment entered against borrower principally on statutory declaration of indebtedness - Whether s. 17 of Evidence Act 1950 conclusive proof provision - Evidence Act 1950, ss. 17, 31 & 102
Randhir Singh Bhajnik Singh v. Sunildave Singh Parmar (The Administrator Of The Estate Of K Surjit Kaur Gean Kartar Singh (Deceased))
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Hanipah Farikullah JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 771 [CA]

LABOUR LAW

Employment - Compensation - Claim for - Employees suffered severe injuries from fire and explosion at factory - Employees instituted action against employers for damages - Whether employees' claim barred under s. 31 of Employees' Social Security Act 1969 - Whether employees had already applied and received compensation from Social Security Organisation of Malaysia (SOCSO) - Whether employees' injuries came within definition of employment injuries - Whether double recovery allowed
Palmamide Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Rajendiran Manickam & Anor
(SM Komathy Suppiah J) [2019] 6 CLJ 843 [HC]

Employment - Injury of employee - Claim for compensation - Employees suffered severe injuries from fire and explosion at factory - Employees instituted action against employers for damages - Whether employees' claim barred under s. 31 of Employees' Social Security Act 1969 - Whether employees had already applied and received compensation from Social Security Organisation of Malaysia (SOCSO) - Whether employees' injuries came within definition of employment injuries - Whether double recovery allowed
Palmamide Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Rajendiran Manickam & Anor
(SM Komathy Suppiah J) [2019] 6 CLJ 843 [HC]

LAND LAW

Land acquisition - Compensation - Award of compensation leading to land references - Land owner withdrew application to intervene - Whether court could order joinder of land owner as co-respondent suo motu - Whether land owner 'person interested' under s. 2(1) read with s. 44(2) of Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Whether entitled to intervene - Whether affected by land reference - Whether joinder order would ensure finality in litigation - Rules of Court 2012, O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1(2), O. 15 r. 6(2)(b)(i) & (ii)
Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia v. Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang
(Wong Kian Kheong J) [2019] 6 CLJ 834 [HC]

Title - Fraud - Land title held by 46 natives - Natives granted power of attorney to first individual who entered into sale and purchase agreement with purchasers for sale of land - Land titles issued to first individual but collected by second individual - Director of Lands and Surveys Department gave permission to natives to transfer lands to second individual - Second individual entered into sale and purchase agreement with third individual - Third individual entered into sale and purchase agreement with fourth individual who sold lands to company - Whether third individual registered owner of lands - Whether sale of lands from third individual to fourth individual valid - Whether endorsements of transfer valid - Whether tainted with forgeries or fraud - Whether there was conspiracy and collusion to defraud purchasers
Kwan Ngen Wah & Ors v. Hiew Kon Fah & Ors And Other Appeals
(Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Mary Lim, Yaacob Md Sam JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 722 [CA]

SUCCESSION

Probate - Will - Validity - Grant of probate - Secret trust - Whether court could strike out secret trust argument based on illegality or public policy - Whether defence of secret trust could be demolished - Whether deceased had testamentary capacity - Whether there were suspicious circumstances surrounding making of will - Whether all requirements for formality of valid will satisfied - Whether grant of probate ought to be sustained
Chin Huat Yean & Anor v. Chin Jhin Thien & Anor
(Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Abang Iskandar, Kamaludin Md Said JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 701 [CA]

TRUSTS

Constructive trust - Liability - Liability of constructive trustee - Whether constructive trustee had access to all records - Whether constructive trustee a fiduciary of plaintiff's shares - Whether there was disposition of plaintiff's share of proceeds of sale of trust shares in breach of trust obtained by unconscionable conduct of sole trustee and constructive trustee - Whether constructive trustee liable
Sin Kheng Chuan & Anor v. Sin Kheng Hooi
(Abang Iskandar, Badariah Sahamid, Mary Lim JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 782 [CA]

Secret trust - Grant of probate - Whether deceased had testamentary capacity - Whether there were suspicious circumstances surrounding making of will - Whether all requirements for formality of valid will satisfied - Whether court could strike out secret trust argument based on illegality or public policy - Whether defence of secret trust could be demolished - Whether grant of probate ought to be sustained
Chin Huat Yean & Anor v. Chin Jhin Thien & Anor
(Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Abang Iskandar, Kamaludin Md Said JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 701 [CA]

Trustees - Breach of trust - Breach of fiduciary duties - Whether sole trustee of trust breached fiduciary duties as trustee - Whether sole trustee appropriated entire proceeds of disposal of shares - Whether trustee obtained unjust enrichment - Whether trustee exerted undue influence on plaintiff in signing settlement agreement - Whether there was misrepresentation by trustee on true value of shares - Whether share sale transaction unjust - Whether settlement agreement void and unenforceable
Sin Kheng Chuan & Anor v. Sin Kheng Hooi
(Abang Iskandar, Badariah Sahamid, Mary Lim JJCA) [2019] 6 CLJ 782 [CA]

---

LNS Article(s)

1. INTELLIGENT ROBOT AND LEGAL RIGHTS ISSUES: AN ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by SHAHINO MAH ABDULLAH* [2019] 1 LNS(A) lxxxix

[2019] 1 LNS(A) lxxxix



MALAYSIA

---

INTELLIGENT ROBOT AND LEGAL RIGHTS ISSUES:
AN ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE

by
SHAHINO MAH ABDULLAH*

Generally, the intelligent robot is regarded as an object under human possession and responsibility. To safeguard a property means to protect it from damage, harm, theft, exploitation, or injustice. This means any property, including robots, owned by humans is protected by property laws. The suggestion to create 'robot rights' in this case is favourable as it will give a chance for robots to stay safe and protected in many ways. At the same time, it will also safeguard human property (hifz al-mal) from the actions of irresponsible persons or groups.

On the other hand, the person or group in charge of the robot is obliged to bear responsibility in case of violation. The second caliph, Umar al-Khattab, during his reign had shown, through his judgements, various important aspects of owner accountability.

. . .

* Published with kind permission of the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IAIS) Malaysia. (www.iais.org.my).

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. PARDON ME, I'M GOING HOME* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by NIMALAN DEVARAJA** [2019] 1 LNS(A) xci

[2019] 1 LNS(A) xci



MALAYSIA

---

PARDON ME, I'M GOING HOME*

by
NIMALAN DEVARAJA**

The dethroning of Barisan Nasional (and its predecessor, the Alliance Party), after almost 61 years as the governing coalition of Malaysia, was Malaysia's biggest news of 2018.

Hot on its heels, however, was the granting of a royal pardon by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim a long week after the declaration of a new government. The bestowing of the royal pardon brought an end to a tumultuous two decades in the lives of Anwar and his family which had seen him go in and out of prison on various charges.

The royal pardon also enabled Anwar to contest and be elected as the Member of Parliament for Port Dickson (a few hundred kilometres from his usual stomping ground in Permatang Pauh where he had served as a Member of Parliament for six terms) through a by-election engineered to bring him back to the House of Representatives.

. . .

*© 2018 Skrine. This Article was first published in Issue 4/2018 of Legal Insights, a Skrine Newsletter. Reproduced with permission of Skrine.

**Nimalan is a Senior Associate in the Dispute Resolution Division of SKRINE. His main practice areas include arbitration, corporate and commercial litigation, and constitutional, public and administrative law

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

3. PRESERVATION OF THE SUBJECT-MATTER "RES" BEFORE A COURT: THE NEED TO DE-EMPHASIZE FILING OF INJUNCTIONS ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by IJAIYA LEKE BASHIR* [2019] 1 LNS(A) xc

[2019] 1 LNS(A) xc



NIGERIA

---

PRESERVATION OF THE SUBJECT-MATTER "RES" BEFORE A COURT:
THE NEED TO DE-EMPHASIZE FILING OF INJUNCTIONS

by
IJAIYA LEKE BASHIR*

ABSTRACT

Undoubtedly, one of the means by which a party or parties in a suit could preserve the subject-matter brought before any court is by way of injunctions. The preservation of subject-matter by parties to the suit is significant so as not to render nugatory the order of the court at the end of proceedings. Thus, it is a common practice in the Nigerian courts that a party after filing a suit may well file either an interim or interlocutory injunction against his adversaries in order to preserve the subject-matter of the suit. This procedure has not achieved the desired goal in preserving the subject-matter. The aim of this article is to examine the nature of an injunction in the judicial process; it is also aimed at examining the position of the law so that injunction becomes unnecessary as the law recognizes that once parties submit their grievances to a court, the subject-matter must be preserved till the final determination of the case. Given this situation, it is suggested that the court should, as a matter of justice, move away from the procedure of entertaining injunctions for the preservation of the subject-matter.

. . .

* Senior Lecturer in the Department of Private and Property Law, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria;
   E-mail - bl.ijaiya@unilorin.edu.ng, bashirijaiya48@gmail.com.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert