Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #44/2019 31 October 2019

New This Week Case(s) of the Week JURIS TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR v. FOO TIANG SIN & ORS [2019] 9 CLJ 617 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2019 Volume 9 (Part 5) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

JURIS TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR v. FOO TIANG SIN & ORS [2019] 9 CLJ 617
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
WONG KIAN KHEONG J
[CIVIL SUIT NO: 22IP-53-10-2015]
25 JUNE 2018

The requirement that an applicant must serve the sealed copy of a restraining order under O. 45 r. 7(2)(a) of the Rules of Court 2012 has to be read with O. 45 r. 7(6) thereof. If follows that where an applicant has obtained an ex parte order restraining a respondent from tampering with the latter's electronic devices, and the applicant or his solicitor has notified such respondent about the order and its terms by email, facsimile et cetera, O. 45 r. 7(2)(a) is satisfied and there is no more requirement or duty for the applicant to serve personally a copy of the order on the respondent.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Contempt of court - Committal proceedings - Application for - Breach of ex parte restraining order - Contemnor notified of terms of ex parte restraining order by way of email - Whether there was requirement to serve personally copy of sealed restraining order on contemnor - Whether contemnor aware of ex parte restraining order - Whether contemnor legally bound to obey ex parte order even without benefit of legal advice - Public interest to ensure strict compliance with ex parte restraining order outweighed contemnor's plea in mitigation - Whether court ought to impose imprisonment sentence - Rules of Court 2012, O. 45 r. 7(2) & (6)

WORDS & PHRASES: 'copy' - Rules of Court 2012, O. 45 r. 7(2) - Application for committal proceedings - Copy of sealed ex parte order attached to email sent to contemnor - Whether fell within meaning of word 'copy' - Rules of Court 2012, O. 62 r. 3 - Whether contemnor served personally with copy of sealed ex parte restraining order 

---

1. Morteza Feizi Satar v. PP & Another Appeal [2018] 1 LNS 1080 (CA) varying the High Court case of PP v. Morteza Feizi Satar & Ors [Criminal Trial Nos: 45A-113, 115 & 116-2011]

2. Peguam Negara Malaysia v. Chin Chee Kow [2018] 1 LNS 1273 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Chin Chee Kow v. Peguam Negara Malaysia [2017] 2 CLJ 431

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 681	YOSEP YANGUBANI v. PP CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Murder - Private defence - Grave and sudden provocation - Accused claimed that he lost control, took out his parang and stabbed deceased when deceased continued to kick and hit him whilst accused was sleeping - Whether accused was exercising his right of private defence when he inflicted fatal stab wound upon deceased - Whether accused had proved existence of facts or circumstances to warrant his reliance upon exceptions in s. 300 of Penal Code EVIDENCE: Dying declaration - Admissibility - Witnesses had given evidence of exact words spoken by deceased - Whether dying declaration must be reduced into writing as a precondition of its admissibility - Importance of last words exactly spoken by deceased to witnesses - Whether witnesses were very certain that deceased had made statement in answer to their questions - Whether corroboration of witnesses' evidence required For the appellant - Ranbir Singh Sangha; M/s Ranbir S Sangha & Co For the respondent - Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Jabatan Peguam Negara
[2018] 1 LNS 1033	MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD v. SYED AHMAD SAFAR SYED KECHIK CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against striking out order - Trial by affidavits - Premature determination of contentious fact - Recovery of loan facilities - Allegation of fraud and forgery in respect of signatures on loan documents - High Court made findings of fact relying on police expert forensic report - Whether High Court erred in arriving at a determination without benefit of a trial - Whether High Court conducted a trial by affidavits instead of leaving contentious fact finding to a full trial For the appellants - M/s Khong & Son For the respondent - M/s Brijnandan Singh Bhar & Co
[2018] 1 LNS 1196	TEE KAH SING v. SIVA KANNAN PERUMAN & ANOR CONTRACT: Specific performance - Sale and purchase agreement ('SPA') - Duly executed - Purchaser substantially performed his obligations under SPA by payment of deposit and redemption sum - Whether parties having signed SPA are bound by the terms stipulated therein - Whether there was requirement for purchaser to have met vendor before signing SPA - Whether specific performance ought to be allowed pursuant to s. 11(1)(c) and illustration (a) of Specific Relief Act 1950 - Whether pecuniary compensation for non-performance would be an adequate relief CONTRACT: Friendly loan - Existence - Allegation that sale and purchase agreement was executed as collateral to a friendly loan - Whether there was friendly loan given - Whether discussion on friendly loan was between vendor and purchaser - Whether purchaser was a party to loan granted to vendor - Whether sale and purchase agreement was made collateral to a loan For the plaintiff - Tan Vincent; M/s Tan Vincent & Azmi For the defendant - Raman Velu & Jo-Anne Joseph; M/s Raman Velu & Co
[2019] 1 LNS 224	MUHAMMAD MITHALI SAIDIN lwn. PP PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan - Kesalahan merogol di bawah s. 376(2)(k) Kanun Keseksaan - Sama ada terdapat percanggahan yang wujud di antara keterangan saksi-saksi - Sama ada percanggahan keterangan adalah material dan menggugat pembuktian elemen pertuduhan ke atas Tertuduh - Sama ada kelewatan ibu mangsa membuat laporan polis boleh dijadikan alasan meragui kes pendakwaan - Sama ada perlu untuk membuktikan koyakan hymen mangsa dalam kes rogol - Sama ada Mahkamah Rayuan patut menggangu dapatan fakta yang dibuat oleh Hakim Bicara PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Kesalahan merogol di bawah s. 376(2)(k) Kanun Keseksaan - Tertuduh dihukum penjara selama 14 tahun dan 6 sebatan - Sama ada hukuman adalah berlebihan, tidak mencukupi atau tidak sah - Kesalahan pertama Tertuduh - Mangsa seorang OKU - Kepentingan awam KETERANGAN: Keterangan saksi - Mangsa mempunyai ketidakupayaan mental iaitu tahap pemikiran yang rendah - Penilaian keterangan saksi - 'Demeanour' saksi - Sama ada mangsa adalah kompeten memberi keterangan di bawah s. 118 Akta Keterangan 1950 walaupun merupakan OKU - Mangsa dapat menggambarkan bentuk kemaluan Tertuduh - Tertuduh bukan saksi yang jujur - Saksi bagi Tertuduh mempunyai pertalian darah dengan Tertuduh dan tidak boleh diharapkan untuk memberikan keterangan yang neutral Bagi pihak perayu - Azamuddin; T/n Azamuddin & Co Bagi pihak responden - Siti Hajar Mustaffa, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya
[2019] 1 LNS 244	LEE WENG CHUN lwn. TAN KICK YONG & SATU LAGI KONTRAK: Perjanjian jual saham - Kemungkiran terma perjanjian - Defendan-defendan gagal membayar baki harga belian - Defendan-defendan gagal melantik Plaintif sebagai Pengerusi dan Pengarah syarikat dan membayar plaintif ganjaran - Sama ada perjanjian adalah tidak sah atas dasar misrepresentasi dan penipuan - Sama ada pembelaan adalah pembelaan palsu (sham defence) atau pemikiran semula (afterthought) - Sebelum tindakan, defendan-defendan tidak pernah mengadu bahawa perjanjian adalah tidak sah - Sama ada defendan-defendan diestop daripada mempertikaikan kesahihan perjanjian Bagi pihak defendan/perayu - Teo Poh Oon; T/n Teo & Chew Bagi pihak responden/plaintif - Lee Teck Hock; T/n Lee & Chong

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 9 (Part 5)

It is well established that in cases of dishonesty of employees at senior management level, the threshold is low. In cases of alleged poor performance by such employees, the threshold however is hybrid in nature and may become very technical as issues of market forces, economic situation et cetera , may have to be considered.
Andrew Chuah Khim Peik v. HLG Capital Bhd [2019] 9 CLJ 585 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The complaint of wrongful termination or unfair dismissal by an employee of a co-operative society does not fall within the purview of the phrase "dispute touching on the management or business of a co-operative society" in s. 82(1) of the Co-operative Societies Act 1993 and consequently, the Suruhanjaya Malaysia does not have any jurisdiction or power to deal with such a dispute or to refer it to the Tribunal established under s. 83(1) of the Act.
Koperasi Serbausaha Makmur Bhd (KOSMA) v. Jamil Ninggal & Ors [2019] 9 CLJ 600 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The requirement that an applicant must serve the sealed copy of a restraining order under O. 45 r. 7(2)(a) of the Rules of Court 2012 has to be read with O. 45 r. 7(6) thereof. If follows that where an applicant has obtained an ex parte order restraining a respondent from tampering with the latter's electronic devices, and the applicant or his solicitor has notified such respondent about the order and its terms by email, facsimile et cetera, O. 45 r. 7(2)(a) is satisfied and there is no more requirement or duty for the applicant to serve personally a copy of the order on the respondent.
Juris Technologies Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Foo Tiang Sin & Ors [2019] 9 CLJ 617 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Pursuant to s. 62(1) of the National Land Code ('NLC'), the State Authority is vested with the discretionary power to effect reservation of state land and the exercise of the power is legally effective only if it is duly notified in the government gazette. Any genuine error in such gazettle can be corrected pursuant to s. 62(1) read together with s. 40(1) of the Interpretation Acts 1948 & 1967 by issuance of another Gazette Notification.
Kirubakaran T Karthigasu v. Setiausaha Negeri Selangor & Ors And Another Application [2019] 9 CLJ 636 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Communications between members of an organisation on matters of public interest made bona fide pursuant to a duty or of mutual interest between the maker of the statement and the members of the organisation, although capable of being defamatory, may fall under the defences of fair comment and qualified privilege barring express proof of malicious intent.
Nazerra Hanie Khairudin v. Nazlan Baharudin [2019] 9 CLJ 661 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Pensabitan warga asing yang memasuki perairan Malaysia dengan pengenalan vessel yang lain di bawah s. 14(3)(b) Akta Perikanan 1985 adalah sempurna berdasarkan pengakuan bersalah yang sah; Mahkamah boleh memerintahkan pelucuthakkan vesel bawah s. 34 Akta jika vesel tersebut digunakan untuk melakukan satu kesalahan; Ketiadaan perintah perlucuthakkan di dalam perintah termeterai tidak mencacatkan perintah asal.
Pham Van Thoung & Yang Lain lwn. PP [2019] 9 CLJ 680 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Where a witness who has provided partial testimony in court cannot subsequently be found, the admission of hearsay evidence under s. 32(1) of the Evidence Act 1950 is not automatic in nature. The necessity principle entails asking whether the police has taken all necessary steps to ascertain the whereabouts of the maker of the statement before arriving at a conclusion that he is a person who "cannot be found" under the said section.
PP v. Kasmarugaya Sulaiman [2019] 9 CLJ 694 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Seorang pemandu mungkin memandu secara merbahaya tetapi, dalam maksud sabitan bawah s. 41(1) Akta Pengangkutan Jalan 1987, Mahkamah perlu meneliti dan memutuskan sama ada kematian mangsa berlaku semasa pemandu memandu dalam keadaan merbahaya; dan jika tidak, sabitan di bawah s. 42 atau s. 43 adalah lebih wajar.
PP lwn. Mohamad Pogi Abdul Lateb [2019] 9 CLJ 715 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. ARE SECTIONS 56 AND 57 OF THE CENTRAL BANK OF MALAYSIA ACT 2009 CONSTITUTIONAL?* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by PAULINE KOH XIU YI [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxxviii

[2019] 1 LNS(A) cxxviii



MALAYSIA

---

ARE SECTIONS 56 AND 57 OF THE CENTRAL BANK OF MALAYSIA ACT 2009 CONSTITUTIONAL?*

by
PAULINE KOH XIU YI

IN THIS ARTICLE, PAULINE KOH XIU YI LOOKS AT THE CASE OF JRI RESOURCES SDN BHD V. KUWAIT FINANCE HOUSE (M) BHD (PRESIDENT OF ASSOCIATION OF ISLAMIC BANKING INSTITUTIONS MALAYSIA, INTERVENERS)^[1] ON WHETHER SECTIONS 56 AND 57 OF THE CENTRAL BANK OF MALAYSIA ACT 2009 ARE CONSTITUTIONAL.

Introduction

The Federal Court, by a majority, held that sections 56^[2] and 57^[3] of the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009 (“CBMA 2009”) under which the Shariah Advisory Council (“SAC”^[4]) gave its rulings on the Shariah matter arising in the subject financing were constitutional and did not breach the Federal Constitution (“FC”).

. . .

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

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. ANCIENT GREECE, MODERN AUSTRALIA AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by HON CHRISSA LOUKAS-KARLSSON** [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxxvii

[2019] 1 LNS(A) cxxvii



AUSTRALIA

---

ANCIENT GREECE, MODERN AUSTRALIA AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE*

by
HON CHRISSA LOUKAS-KARLSSON**

Justice Loukas-Karlsson delivered the ACT Hellenic Australian Lawyers Association's 2018 Theophilos (Tom) Efkarpidis Chapter Oration.

The ACT Hellenic Australian Lawyers oration is named for Theophilos (Tom) Efkarpidis. Tom was a major figure in the Canberra Community.

Tom arrived in Australia in 1962. He began life in Australia working in Greek cafés in NSW, including in Albury, Leeton, Forbes, and finally Canberra in 1964.

Tom and his brother Anastasio were by this stage creating the groundwork of their business empire at their shop in the new suburb of Curtin.

. . .

* Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos No. 251 March 2019.

** Justice of the Supreme court of the Australian Capital Territory.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert