Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #35/2020 20 August 2020

New This Week Case(s) of the Week BANK KERJASAMA RAKYAT MALAYSIA v. ZAINUL RIJAL ABU BAKAR & ANOR [2020] 7 CLJ 438 PP v. SAMSUL ARIFIN BAKAR [2020] 7 CLJ 503 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2020 Volume 7 (Part 4) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

BANK KERJASAMA RAKYAT MALAYSIA v. ZAINUL RIJAL ABU BAKAR & ANOR [2020] 7 CLJ 438
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
UMI KALTHUM ABDUL MAJID JCA; HASNAH MOHAMMED HASHIM JCA; SURAYA OTHMAN JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02(A)-1179-06-2018]
02 JULY 2020

LEGAL PROFESSION: Disciplinary proceedings - Complaint against solicitor - Whether complaint satisfied requirements under s. 94(3) of Legal Profession Act 1976 - Disciplinary Board ('DB') disagreed with Disciplinary Committee's ('DC') findings and recommendation that no action be taken against solicitor - Appeal against decision of DB - Whether DB failed to provide reasons for not following findings of DC - Whether gross misrepresentation within scope of misconduct under Legal Profession Act 1976 - Whether there was element of biasness in decision of DB - Whether there was breach of s. 103D(1) of Legal Profession Act 1976

---

PP v. SAMSUL ARIFIN BAKAR [2020] 7 CLJ 503
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
YAACOB MD SAM JCA; ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF JCA; RAVINTHRAN PARAMAGURU JCA
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: A-06B-84-11-2018]
11 NOVEMBER 2019

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Acquittal and discharge - Appeal against - Appeal by prosecution - Accused charged with offence of self-administration and consumption of dangerous drugs - Traces of drugs found in urine - Accused acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence - Police officer gave accused one bottle only and dipped strips in urine sample during preliminary test - Whether procedure for urine sample collection complied with - Whether two bottles ought to be used for urine collection - Whether urine sample contaminated - Whether necessary steps taken to request medical officer to take urine sample - Whether prima facie case established - Whether accused ought to be called to enter defence - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 15 & 31A(1A)

CRIMINAL LAW: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 15 - Self-administration and consumption of dangerous drugs - Traces of drugs found in accused's urine - Procedure for urine sample collection - Whether complied with - Police officer gave accused one bottle only and dipped strips in urine sample during preliminary test - Whether two bottles ought to be used for urine collection - Whether urine sample contaminated - Whether necessary steps taken to request medical officer to take urine sample - Whether s. 31A(1A) of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 complied with - Whether prima facie case established

---

1. Sulaiman Abdul Kadir v. PP & Other Appeals [2019] 1 LNS 1736 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PP v. Kamaruzaman Mohamed Shah & Ors [Criminal Trial No: 46-1-06/2011]

2. Yan Naing Soe v. PP [2019] 1 LNS 1604 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PP v. Yan Naing Soe [Criminal Trial MTJB No: 45B-04-03/2016]

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 1333	UTHAYAKUMAR PONNUSAMY v. ABDUL WAHAB ABDUL KASSIM & ORS 1. Reinstatement of substantive contempt proceedings would not be appropriate when the Court of Appeal had ruled that the leave granted by the High Court for contempt proceedings which was based on non-adherence of a mere administrative direction was defective. 2. Non-compliance of a mere administrative direction does not amount to contempt of court and thus procedures under O. 52 of the Rules of Court 2012 cannot be invoked. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Action - Reinstatement - Substantive contempt proceedings - Contempt proceedings commenced as a result of non-compliance of mere administrative direction - Proceedings struck out following absence of applicant's counsel during case management - Court of Appeal ruled leave granted for contempt proceedings was defective - Whether contempt proceedings already nugatory - Whether reinstatement appropriate - Whether reinstatement should be allowed when there was absolutely no basis to pursue committal proceedings CIVIL PROCEDURE: Contempt of court - Committal proceedings - Non-compliance of administrative direction - Whether there could be any contempt against mere non-adherence of an administrative direction - Whether procedures under O. 52 of Rules of Court 2012 could be invoked For the appellant - M Manogaran; M/s Manogar & Co For the respondent - Hanim Mohd Rashid & Muhammad Azmi Mashud; Peguam Kanan Persekutuan; Jabatan Peguam Negara
[2018] 1 LNS 1341	PP v. NASIR RAMLI The conduct of the accused in leaving the badly injured and semi-conscious deceased alone in a car without attempting to seek medical treatment for the deceased, coupled with a history of beatings and criminal intimidation supported by police reports lodged by the deceased was sufficient to show that the accused was capable of and had intention to kill the deceased. CRIMINAL LAW: Murder - Intention - Circumstantial evidence - Conduct of accused - Deceased died due to head injuries suffered - Injury to head caused bleeding to brain which was fatal - Accused was last seen with deceased - Accused refused to send deceased to hospital and left deceased alone in car in a semi-conscious condition - Existence of previous beatings and criminal intimidation reported by deceased to police against accused - Accused absconded and disappeared after incident - Whether accused was capable of committing crime - Whether accused had intention to kill deceased For the prosecution - DPP Wan Mohd I'zzat Wan Abdullah (at the end of the prosecution stage) & DPP Mohd Fuad Abdul Aziz (at the end of defence case) For the accused - Robert Ayu of Jaini; Robert & Lau
[2019] 1 LNS 426	SUNDRA MOORTHY SENDARAYAN lwn. PP Mahkamah perlu melihat sama ada tertuduh mempunyai sebarang pembelaan yang kukuh terhadap pertuduhan dalam menimbangkan pengakuan salah sebagai faktor mitigasi ketika menentukan hukuman. Hukuman pemenjaraan yang panjang adalah berasas dan mempunyai justifikasi yang kukuh apabila tertuduh telah mengkhianati amanah dengan merogol anak saudaranya. PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Penghukuman - Prinsip-prinsip penghukuman - Kesalahan rogol statutori - Mitigasi - Pengakuan salah - Mangsa mempunyai pertalian darah dengan tertuduh - Sama ada penyandaran kepada pengakuan salah semata-mata merupakan faktor mitigasi yang utama untuk meringankan hukuman yang dijatuhkan - Sama ada pembelaan yang kukuh terhadap pertuduhan perlu wujud dalam menimbangkan pengakuan salah sebagai faktor mitigasi - Sama ada hukuman bersifat menghalang atau mencegah perlu dijatuhkan - Sama ada hukuman pemenjaraan yang panjang adalah berasas Bagi pihak perayu - Kannan Ratnam; T/n Sundarajan & Associates Bagi pihak responden - TPR Anis Wahidah Mohammad; Bahagian Pendakwaan, Jabatan Peguam Negara; Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan
[2019] 1 LNS 427	PP lwn. SHEIKDAWUD M MOHAMED MUSTAFA & YANG LAIN Perbuatan tertuduh yang hadir di tempat kejadian bagi memastikan wang tersedia bagi urusan penjualan dadah yang dibincangkan dan penyerahan dadah oleh tertuduh kepada agen provokator merupakan satu perbuatan penyerahan sebenar dadah bagi tujuan pengedaran. Penyerahan sebenar telah berlaku walaupun wang yang disediakan tidak diserahkan. UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Dadah berbahaya - Pengedaran - Penyerahan sebenar dadah - Penglibatan agen provokator - Kewujudan perundingan dan penyerahan dadah kepada agen provokator - Sama ada wujud penyerahan sebenar - Sama ada transaksi penjualan dadah telah lengkap walaupun wang tidak lagi diserahkan PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Penafian - Tertuduh menafikan mempunyai pengetahuan berkenaan dadah berbahaya - Tertuduh mendakwa dadah adalah milik penama yang lain yang ditahan bersama tertuduh - Penama yang dicadangkan oleh tertuduh adalah individu penting dalam naratif kes pembelaan dan tidak dipanggil sebagai saksi - Sama ada kegagalan untuk memanggil penama yang dicadangkan oleh tertuduh telah memberi kesan pada keberatan dan kredibiliti pembelaan Bagi pihak perayu (1) - Selvam Shanmugam; T/n Selvam Shanmugam & Partners Bagi pihak perayu (2) - Kitson Foong; T/n Kit and Associates Bagi pihak perayu (3) - Amritpal Singh; T/n Amrit & Co Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Siti Balkiah Abd Yazaid, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Selangor
[2019] 1 LNS 458	EMIRIZWAN MOHD ROSLAN lwn. TENAGA NASIONAL BHD Kewujudan surat defendan yang tidak menafikan liabilitinya terhadap kerosakan kabel elektrik kepunyaan plaintif serta tuntutan plaintif dan diikuti dengan permohonan bayaran ansuran baki tuntutan tidak mewujudkan isu-isu yang mewajarkan perbicaraan. PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman terus - Kecuaian - Tuntutan untuk kerugian dalam membaikpulih kabel elektrik dan kerugian jualan unit elektrik - Kerosakan kabel elektrik plaintif akibat kerja-kerja pengorekan Tanah oleh defendan - Kewujudan surat pengakuan liabiliti defendan terhadap kerosakan kabel dan permohonan bayaran ansuran untuk baki tuntutan - Defendan cuba untuk mempertikaikan surat-surat yang dikeluarkan oleh defendan - Ketiadaan laporan polis berkenaan dakwaan pemalsuan tandatangan - Sama ada pembelaan defendan bersifat penafian kosong - Sama ada tuntutan plaintif dihalang had masa - Sama ada terdapat isu-isu untuk dibicarakan Bagi pihak plaintif - Sarah Hani Rohizam; T/n Lim Huck Aik & Co Bagi pihak defendan - Muhamad Imran Mohamad Farok; T/n Rosli Ismail & Co

---

CLJ 2020 Volume 7 (Part 4)

Promotion for a public servant always comes within the purview of the Public Service Commission and is dependent on such factors as merit, personal qualities, length of service et cetera. Promotion for a holder of a post within the Civil Service is not an entitlement and thus can never be an automatic progression of a public servant's career within the service. Where therefore a public servant has been subjected to disciplinary investigations by his Department or Departmental Head, and thereafter has not been promoted to higher posts or salary grades, that per se cannot translate to a case of unfair or unlawful deprivation of promotions, and likewise, cannot form a basis for a claim for damages against the Government.
Ang Ek Koon v. Director, Public Works Department Sarawak & Ors [2020] 7 CLJ 423 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

As so mandatorily required by s. 103D(1) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (LPA), the Disciplinary Board, in seeking to depart from the findings and recommendations of the Disciplinary Committee, must provide reasons for its decision. Providing reasons, justification or elaboration as the case may be to support its view means that the Board must advert to some kind of thought-process explaining how it arrived at its conclusion. Where the Committee had ruled that a certain legal advice as given by a solicitor to his client lacked the element of dishonesty or fraud, and was thus a mere negligence or tortious oversight, and not misconduct as spoken of in s. 94(3) of the LPA, and the Board, in rejecting the Committee's finding, opined that the advice given was tantamount instead to gross misrepresentation but without giving any reasons therefor, then such an unreasoned finding constitutes nothing more than just a plain or bare view of the Board, and more, a clear breach of the mandatory requirement of s. 103D(1) LPA.
Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia v. Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar & Anor [2020] 7 CLJ 438 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A registered proprietor of a piece of land is entitled to have any structure encroaching on his land demolished, or alternatively to offer for sale the area occupied by the impugned structure. It is contrary to the finality of a registered title if a neighbour's enjoyment of his land can extend beyond his registered entitlement so as to include the adjacent land belonging to another neighbour or proprietor.
ECH Development & Management Sdn Bhd v. Prabagaran Perumal & Anor And Another Appeal [2020] 7 CLJ 451 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A beneficiary to an estate, in commencing an action on behalf of the estate, requires Letters of Administration (LA) and needs to show special circumstances to support the suit. This said, it is not utterly erroneous to say that a beneficiary also has an equity which may entitle him to seek on behalf of the estate the remedy of a declaratory judgment. Hence, where a property under an estate has been fraudulently transferred to a purported purchaser, the beneficiary is entitled and indeed empowered in law, even in the absence of the LA, to institute an action to set aside or nullify the fraudulent transfer. The action is competent and valid, as the fraudulent transfer, by itself, provides the required special circumstances and clothes the beneficiary with the required locus standi.
Lai Wooi Giap v. Rosli Zakaria & Anor [2020] 7 CLJ 477 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A company involved with leasing transactions in Labuan such as the appellant falls within the purview of the Labuan Financial Services Authority ('LFSA'), a central regulatory, supervisory and enforcement authority of the international business and financial services industry in Labuan. The requirements for payment of fee and approval from the LFSA for every subsequent leasing transaction under Item 8.2 of the Guidelines on the Establishment & Operations of Labuan Leasing Business is not ultra vires s. 7(6) of the Labuan Companies Act 1990, and needs therefore to be complied with by the appellant.
Nabors Drilling (Labuan) Corporation v. Lembaga Perkhidmatan Kewangan Labuan [2020] 7 CLJ 496 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Section 31A(1A) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, which allows a urine sample to be taken by a police officer, appears to target drug addicts specifically and is a provision designed to preserve evidence within the possible constraints faced by a medical officer to examine the addict pursuant to s. 31A(1) of the Act. Section 31A(1A) cannot, however, be read to mean that the police, to be able to invoke the section, must first wait for the medical officer to determine whether it was or was not practicable for him to examine the addict, as time would be wasted and traces of drugs in the body of a suspect could have disappeared by the time the urine sample is obtained by the medical officer. In the premise, it must consequentially follow that the test result from a urine sample, as so obtained by the police officer under s. 31A(1A) herein, cannot be rendered inadmissible merely because it has not been proved that sending the suspect to a medical officer to take the urine sample in question is not practicable in the circumstances of the case.
PP v. Samsul Arifin Bakar [2020] 7 CLJ 503 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Although an application for assessment of damages should be done 'with all convenient speed', the delay, for valid reasons, ought not to deprive the party, in whose favour the liability issue was decided, the benefit of the decision. Order 37 r. 1 of the Rules of Court 2012 must be read with O. 34 to ensure that all proceedings are proceeded with justly, expeditiously as well as economically.
Vellasamy Ponnusamy & Ors v. Gurbachan Singh Bagawan Singh & Anor [2020] 7 CLJ 512 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A claim for losses arising from an agreement, especially one where there are allegations of payment of large sums of money, must be supported by hard evidence. Failure to do so may lead to the irresistible conclusion that no such payment was made.
Yayasan Selangor v. Aviation Development Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd [2020] 7 CLJ 529 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

An error in the amount stated in a bankruptcy notice should be treated as a minor error and should be cured by a simple amendment made thereto. Irrespective of whether such error constitutes a non-compliance of r. 90(1)(b) of the Insolvency Rules 2017 or not, since it cannot mislead, prejudice or cause any injustice to the judgment debtor, the bankruptcy notice cannot be invalidated on the ground of such error per se.
Re Chua Liang Hong; Ex p: Kuala Excel Sdn Bhd [2020] 7 CLJ 547 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. A LOOK AT ISSUES FACED BY EMPLOYERS AS A RESULT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND ENSUING MOVEMENT CONTROL ORDER* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Wong Kian Jun [2020] 1 LNS(A) lxxxv

[2020] 1 LNS(A) lxxxv



MALAYSIA

---

A LOOK AT ISSUES FACED BY EMPLOYERS AS A RESULT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND ENSUING MOVEMENT CONTROL ORDER*

by
Wong Kian Jun

In this article, Wong Kian Jun looks at the main issues faced by employers as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Introduction

The Covid-19 global pandemic which has swept the globe and caused many countries to introduce various degrees of lock down measures has given rise to various issues and scenarios which an employer must deal with and manage. This is no different for employers in Malaysia where the Government has implemented the Movement Control Order (“MCO”) since 18 March 2020 which saw the economic activity brought to a halt.

. . .

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

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. WHAT CAN LAWYERS DO TO PROTECT OUR NATIVE WILDLIFE?* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Tara Ward** [2020] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvi

[2020] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvi



AUSTRALIA

---

WHAT CAN LAWYERS DO TO PROTECT OUR NATIVE WILDLIFE?*

by
Tara Ward**

The recent bushfires have put the plight of our native wildlife at the forefront of the national consciousness. Here, the Animal Defenders Office considers the legal status of native wild animals in Australia.

Recent Law Weeks in the ACT have explored the theme of ‘Lawyers: Protecting Your Rights’.^[1] As part of Law Week 2019 the Animal Defenders Office presented a seminar to members of the legal profession and the community at large about the billions of non-human animals who do not have rights, and the global quest by lawyers to obtain basic rights for at least some animals.^[2]

In the summer of 2019-20, Australia was ravaged by bushfires. Our collective heart broke as we watched the devastating images of burnt and injured native animals stumble out from the fires. We were then plunged into profound despair as we thought of the suffering of the animal victims we could not see.

. . .

*Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos Law Week 2020.

*Tara Ward is the co-founder of the Animal Defenders Office, and volunteers as Executive Director and Principal Lawyer for the organisation. Tara also teaches animal law at the University of NSW.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert