Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #32/2019 08 August 2019

New This Week Case(s) of the Week AMBANK (M) BHD & ORS v. LIM SUE BENG [2019] 7 CLJ 289 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2019 Volume 7 (Part 3) Articles LNS Article(s) CLJ Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

AMBANK (M) BHD & ORS v. LIM SUE BENG [2019] 7 CLJ 289
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
AZAHAR MOHAMED FCJ, BALIA YUSOF WAHI FCJ, ALIZATUL KHAIR OSMAN FCJ, ROHANA YUSUF FCJ, MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: 03-1-03-2018(W)]
15 MAY 2019

An amendment to a bankruptcy notice to remove the name of one co-petitioner under s. 93(3) of the Bankruptcy Act 1967 is not permissible as it would change the character of a bankruptcy notice and creditor’s petition causing prejudice to the respondent

BANKRUPTCY: Notice – Amendment – Application by one co-petitioner to cease to be a party in bankruptcy proceedings – Whether court allowed to remove references to co-petitioner – Whether amendments would have effect of changing bankruptcy notice – Whether exercise of High Court’s powers under s. 93(3) of Bankruptcy Act 1967 limited to clerical or minor errors that cause no prejudice to judgment debtor – Whether amendment would change character of bankruptcy notice and creditor’s petition

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Parties – Amendment – Application by one co-petitioner to cease to be a party in bankruptcy proceedings – Whether court allowed to remove references to co-petitioner – Whether amendments would have effect of changing bankruptcy notice – Whether exercise of High Court’s powers under s. 93(3) of Bankruptcy Act 1967 limited to clerical or minor errors that cause no prejudice to judgment debtor – Whether amendment would change character of bankruptcy notice and creditor’s petition

---

1. Abdullah Atan lwn. PP [2019] 1 LNS 285 (CA) mengesahkan kes Mahkamah Tinggi PP lwn. Abdullah Atan [Perbicaraan Jenayah No: 45A-34-10/2016]

2. Samim Sainsha v. PP [2019] 1 LNS 360 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PP v. Samim Sainsha [Criminal Trial No: 45A-11-02/2014]

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 635	MUHAMMAD AFANDI MUKHTAR v. PP CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentencing - Appeal - Conviction for offences of robbery - Sentence of 9 years, 2 whippings - Whether sentence adequate - Whether sentence reflected gravity and severity of offence - Plea of guilty and use of dangerous weapon in committing offence considered - Sentencing trend for this type of offence -Whether appellate intervention required For the appellant - Mohd Ridzuan Muhammad; M/s Mohd Fadzli & Co For the respondent - DPP Hajarul Falenna Itah Abu Bakar Adli; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kelantan
[2018] 1 LNS 778	KASI KL PALANIAPPAN v. CYBERVIEW SDN BHD & ANOR LAND LAW: Restrictions in dealings - Private caveat - Extension of private caveat - Whether plaintiff has caveatable interest - Plaintiff relied on sale and purchase agreement with first defendant and developer - Deposit of 10% purchase price paid by plaintiff - Balance of purchase price not paid within stipulated time - Several requests for extension of time made by plaintiff - Whether caveat should remain on land - National Land Code 1965, ss. 322, 323, 326, 327 For the plaintiff - SC Ho; M/s Wilson Wong Tan For the first defendant - Eric Clement; M/s Abd Halim Ushah & Associates For the second defendant - Mohd Aizan; Kamar Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Selangor
[2018] 1 LNS 923	LOW BOON ENG & ORS v. TEO KIONG HUAT & ORS & ANOTHER APPEAL CIVIL PROCEDURE: Limitation - Whether statute-barred - Whether limitation period applicable to fraudulent breach of trust - Whether limitation period applicable to Institutional trusts - Limitation Act 1953, s. 22(1)(b) TRUSTS: Constructive trustee - Types of constructive trustees - The difference between constructive trustee arising from operation of law and one arising from implication of fraud - Whether limitation period applicable - Limitation Act 1953, s. 22(1)(b) TRUSTS: Constructive trust - Purchase of shares by appellants and respondents in company that owns third appellant - Purchase of shares in joint venture exercise with shareholdings of 4,000,002 shares (including 2 founding shares) to appellants and 4,000,000 shares to respondents - Whether two founding shares belong to appellants - Intentions of the respective groups when they decided to purchase shares - Whether two founding shares should be neutralized by claiming back one founding share - Whether neutralizing one founding share should be premised on concept of constructive trust For the appellant - M David Morais & Vince Chong & Raul Lee Bhaskaran; M/s Nik Hussain & Partners For the respondent - Meyappan Pillai & Alvin Teo Sze Pin; M/s Mak Ng Shao & Kee
[2018] 1 LNS 447	KHAIRUL NORDIN lwn. PP UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Bunuh - Niat - Kematian si mati disebabkan luka incise di bahagian perut akibat tikaman pisau - Sama ada niat tertuduh boleh dibuktikan secara inferen melalui keterangan dan perlakuan tertuduh dan dari jenis kecederaan - Sama ada kecederaan fatal akibat tusukan yang kuat adalah keterangan yang mencukupi untuk membuktikan niat untuk menyebabkan bencana tubuh ke atas simati - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai niat untuk menyebabkan kematian ke atas simati PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Pertahanan persendirian - Pertengkaran dan pergaduhan - Tertuduh dilihat memegang pisau dan sarung pisau di kedua-dua tangan - Simati tidak memegang sebarang senjata sebelum berlaku pergelutan - Sama ada tertuduh berada dalam situasi ancaman ke atas nyawanya atau keselamatannya - Sama ada tertuduh telah mengambil peluang yang tidak berpatutan apabila menggunakan pisau untuk menikam simati - Sama ada tertuduh berhak kepada perlindungan hak pertahanan persendirian yang diperuntukkan di bawah s. 300 Kanun Keseksaan Bagi pihak perayu - Asmawi & Nur Asmawi; T/n I Asmawi & Co Bagi pihak responden - Norinna Bahaddun, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Jabatan Peguam Negara
[2018] 1 LNS 188	MOHAMAD AZHAR YUSSOH lwn. MOHAMAD HAIRUL ALHAFIZ ZAN IMI & SATU LAGI DAN SATU LAGI KES LALULINTAS JALAN: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Penentuan liabiliti - Perlanggaran antara dua motosikal - Perlanggaran berlaku ketika motosikal defendan mengubah laluan dari kiri ke kanan secara tiba-tiba - Sama ada defendan mempunyai tugas untuk berhati-hati sekiranya ingin mengubah haluan - Sama ada defendan telah bertindak secara cuai semasa menunggang motosikal sehinggakan berlakunya kemalangan - Sama ada terdapat ruang untuk plaintif mengelak kemalangan - Sama ada defendan wajar dikenakan tanggungan cuai sepenuhnya GANTI RUGI: Ganti rugi am - Taksiran - Kehilangan deria tubuh - Deria bau - Usia muda - Sama ada jumlah sebanyak RM30,000 adalah awad yang munasabah Bagi pihak perayu kes AA-12B-19-05/2017 dan bagi pihak responden kes AA-12B-22-05/2017 - Nur Aleeya Aria Nyakot Abdullah; T/n Sivaraja & Co Bagi pihak perayu-perayu kes AA-12B-22-05/2017 dan bagi pihak responden-responden kes AA-12B-19-05/2017 - Fazilah Sudin; T/n Imtiaz Choong & Partners

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 7 (Part 3)

FEDERAL COURT

An amendment to a bankruptcy notice to remove the name of one co-petitioner under s. 93(3) of the Bankruptcy Act 1967 is not permissible as it would change the character of a bankruptcy notice and creditor’s petition causing prejudice to the respondent
AmBank (M) Bhd & Ors v. Lim Sue Beng [2019] 7 CLJ 289 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

COURT OF APPEAL

Res judicata applies in cases where a similar cause of action is brought on the same subject matter, even though the reliefs sought in the first suit are different from the second suit, and the parties in the second suit are different from the first suit.
Metreco Industries Sdn Bhd v. Muhammad Fadhil Ab Wahid & Another Appeal [2019] 7 CLJ 312 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In order for a claimant to succeed in its claim, the claimant must show that the loss and damages are due to the breach of contract or negligence by the defendant. Once that is established, the claimant has the additional burden of proving the damages
Tetuan Bahari Choy & Nongchik v. Harta Megajaya Sdn Bhd [2019] 7 CLJ 332 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The defence of insanity is not available to an accused who was not labouring under any form of unsoundness of mind and knew that the nature of what he did was against the law.
Tiong Ing Soon v. PP [2019] 7 CLJ 341 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Section 368A(1) of the Companies Act 1965 may only be invoked by the Registrar or by a person whose interests were either affected or would be affected; it was therefore imperative that the respondents state how the conduct of the appellant affected their interests
Wong Kien Ching v. Seng Kim Huat & Anor [2019] 7 CLJ 356 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

HIGH COURT

The income of a doctor derived from his incorporated medical business under a Resident Consultant Agreement with a private hospital, being a contract for services, is taxable as individual income under s. 4(a) of the Income Tax Act 1967 and not the company’s income.
Dato' Dr Singaraveloo Muthusamy & Anor v. Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif/Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri & Anor [2019] 7 CLJ 370 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Kegagalan Lembaga Penasihat mendengar permohonan representasi yang dibuat oleh orang tahanan di bawah s. 9(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 adalah satu ketidakpatuhan prosedur yang mencacatkan syor Lembaga kepada Yang di-PertuanAgong di bawah kk. 5(3) dan 5(4) Peraturan Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) (Prosedur Lembaga Penasihat) 1987. Ia boleh menyebabkan penahanan orang tahanan diisytiharkan tak sah dan batal
Gan Ah Som lwn. Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri Malaysia & Yang Lain [2019] 7 CLJ 385 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. MALAYSIA: A NEW HOPE (AND SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT CAME WITH IT)* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by NIMALAN DEVARAJA** [2019] 1 LNS(A) ci

[2019] 1 LNS(A) ci



MALAYSIA

---

MALAYSIA: A NEW HOPE (AND SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT CAME WITH IT)*

by
NIMALAN DEVARAJA**

May 9, 2018. A day that will be forever etched in the memories of Malaysians who witnessed the 14th General Elections (“GE14”). It was the day on which Malaysians witnessed, for the first time since the country’s independence, a change in government. The 61-year-old Barisan Nasional coalition (and its predecessor, the Alliance Party), long synonymous with Malaysia, were ousted from power by the barely two-year old Pakatan Harapan coalition.

While we have witnessed with excitement or trepidation (depending on who is asked) the rise of interesting (and possibly controversial) developments in the Malaysian fabric since the change of government, the period leading up to, and immediately after, GE14 was also not without its share of dramatic events.

. . .

*© 2018 Skrine. This Article was first published in issue 2/2018 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.

2. THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by TENGKU AHMAD HAZRI [2019] 1 LNS(A) xcix

[2019] 1 LNS(A) xcix



MALAYSIA

---

THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION*

by
TENGKU AHMAD HAZRI

Despite the primacy of the written constitution, despite its lofty status as the very foundation of the nation and the embodiment of the social contract, recent trends nevertheless reveal a shift away from the black letters of the law towards a search for the moral foundations of the constitution that are largely unwritten.

Significantly, from all sides of the debates, the sanctity of the constitution itself has been upheld, and although different parties have advanced different interpretations of its ideals and history, none have gone to the point of challenging its validity as such.

. . .

* 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.

3. PLEA AND PLEA BARGAINING: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PRACTICE IN NIGERIA AND THE UNITED STATES ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Okanyi, Donatus Onuora^[i]Ugochukwu Charles Kanu, LL.M (Northumbria)^[ii]Ifeoma Ononye, LL.M^[iii] [2019] 1 LNS(A) c

[2019] 1 LNS(A) c



NIGERIA

---

PLEA AND PLEA BARGAINING: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PRACTICE IN NIGERIA AND THE UNITED STATES

by
Okanyi Donatus Onuora^[i]
Ugochukwu Charles Kanu LL.M (Northumbria)^[ii]
Ifeoma Ononye LL.M^[iii]

ABSTRACT

The concept of plea of the defendant and/or accused person which is of immemorial antiquity heralds the commencement of criminal trials in Nigeria and by extension the world over. Without plea there will be no plea bargain, hence the need for the understanding of the intricate concept of plea and plea bargain. Plea bargain has come to stay as an aspect of Nigeria's criminal justice system, though it is a new innovation in the Nigerian criminal justice system. Though the concept had a doubtful origin regarding its acceptance in our criminal justice system, recent Federal and State legislations, particularly the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 (ACJA), have recognized the concept and made copious provisions relating to its application.

. . .

[i] Lecturer I, Nigerian Law School, Agbani, Enugu State, Nigeria. He is a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK) amongst other professional bodies. +2348039697765 okanyidonjude@yahoo.com okanyi.onuora@nigerianlawschool.edu.ng.

[ii] Lecturer I, Lecturer in Law (Department of Criminal Litigation) Nigerian Law School, Lagos Campus; kanu@lawschoollagos.org.

[iii] Lecturer I, Nigerian Law School, Headquarters, Abuja. ononyeiu@yahoo.com.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

CLJ Article(s)

1. DIRECTORS DUTIES: THE FOUNDATION OF GOOD CORPORATE GOVERNANCE (PART 1) ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by DR USHARANI BALASINGAM* [2019] 7 CLJ(A) i

[2019] 7 CLJ(A) i



MALAYSIA

---

DIRECTORS DUTIES: THE FOUNDATION OF GOOD CORPORATE GOVERNANCE (PART 1)

by
DR USHARANI BALASINGAM*


This paper comes in two parts. The first opens with the concept of fiduciary and need for it even though s. 220 of the Companies Act 2016 has removed the expressed provision of 'rule of law' as a source of law to regulate directors' duties. It covers the interlaced aspect of fiduciary within the shoes of the directors and the statutory aspects of directors' duties. The second part returns to the fiduciary duties covering areas of trust and remedies.

Directors are fiduciaries of the company. With this comes a weight of responsibilities founded on trust to be discharged in an honourable manner. This in turn seeks to ensure that the businesses are inherently cultivated with values to ensure the business sustainability.^[1] This is in line with the realisation that no matter what structure or processes are in place for governance, the integrity and ethics of the individual directors, board of directors and key players in the check mechanisms are very crucial factors.

. . .

* Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert