Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #53/2020 24 December 2020

New This Week Case(s) of the Week KETUA PEGAWAI PENGUATKUASA AGAMA & ORS v. MAQSOOD AHMAD & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL [2020] 10 CLJ 748 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2020 Volume 10 (Part 6) Articles CLJ Article(s) LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

KETUA PEGAWAI PENGUATKUASA AGAMA & ORS v.
MAQSOOD AHMAD & ORS AND ANOTHER APPEAL [2020] 10 CLJ 748
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
BADARIAH SAHAMID JCA; ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF JCA; NOR BEE ARIFFIN JCA
[CIVIL APPEALS NO: B-01(A)-468-07-2018 & B-01(A)-513-08-2018]
25 AUGUST 2020

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties - Freedom of religion - Jurisdiction of Syariah Court - Matters related to Syariah as defined in Item 1, List II of Ninth Schedule of Federal Constitution - Whether confined to persons 'professing the religion of Islam' - Persons of Ahmadiyya religion - Fatwa removing legal status of Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at religious group as persons 'professing the religion of Islam' in Selangor - Whether fell within jurisdiction of civil court - Federal Constitution, arts. 11(1) & 121(1A)

JURISDICTION: Courts - Jurisdiction - Offence under s. 97 of Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 ('ARIE') - Proper forum - Whether Syariah Court or Magistrate's Court - Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at religious group - Fatwa removing legal status of Ahmadiyya community as persons 'professing the religion of Islam' in Selangor - Whether s. 74(2) of ARIE applicable to Ahmadiyya in Selangor

---

1. Pegawai Pengurus Pilihanraya Dewan v. Dr Streram Sinnasamy & Ors [2019] 1 LNS 589 (CA) overruling the High Court case of Dr. Streram Sinnasamy v. Mohamad Haji Hassan & Ors [Petisyen Pilihan Raya No: NA-26PP-1-05/2018]

2. Boniface Lobo Robert V Lobo & Anor v. Tribunal Pengurusan Strata, Putrajaya & Ors [2019] 1 LNS 680 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Boniface Lobo Robert V Lobo & Anor v. Tribunal Pengurusan Strata, Putrajaya & Ors [2017] 6 CLJ 537

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 606	LO CHUN HUNG lwn. NOOR HASLIZA MAT HASAN & YANG LAIN Perlakuan pejalan kaki yang secara tiba-tiba melintas jalan di laluan motorsikal dan mengakibatkan kemalangan membolehkan penunggang motorsikal bergantung kepada doktrin 'agony of the moment' dan senario sedemikian boleh melepaskan penunggang motorsikal daripada sebarang tanggungan ke atas kemalangan. LALULINTAS JALAN: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Penentuan liabiliti - Pejalan kaki dilanggar oleh motorsikal - Perlanggaran dari arah belakang - Pejalan kaki secara tiba-tiba melintas jalan di laluan motorsikal - Kecederaan ke atas pejalan kaki tertumpu di bahagian kanan badan - Sama ada pejalan kaki telah cuai dan mengakibatkan kemalangan - Sama ada penunggang motorsikal boleh bergantung kepada doktrin 'agony of the moment' - Sama ada penunggang motorsikal dan pejalan kaki wajar bertanggungan 50%-50% ke atas kemalangan Bagi pihak perayu - Hamdi Zainol; T/n NM Tiong & Co Bagi pihak responden-responden - Mohamad Rizal Fadzil, Peguam Persekutuan; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kedah
[2018] 1 LNS 633	PP lwn. TENGKU FARIS ENGKU BONGSU 1. Tindakan tertuduh yang terkejut, takut dan cuba melarikan diri berserta pergelutan antara tertuduh dengan pasukan serbuan memberikan inferen bahawa tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan ke atas dadah yang dijumpai di dalam motorsikal yang dibawa oleh tertuduh. 2. Pihak pembelaan seharusnya mencadangkan kepada saksi-saksi pendakwaan watak-watak yang dibangkitkan oleh tertuduh untuk menyokong pembelaan pembawa tidak bersalah tertuduh. Kegagalan sedemikian jelas menunjukkan bahawa watak-watak yang didakwa oleh tertuduh adalah satu rekaan semata-mata sekaligus menjadikan pembelaan pembawa tidak bersalah sebagai satu penafian semata-mata. UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Dadah berbahaya - Pengedaran - Dadah jenis methamphetamine seberat 109.1g - Dadah dijumpai di dalam motorsikal yang ditunggang oleh tertuduh - Tertuduh terkejut, takut dan cuba melarikan diri selepas pasukan serbuan memperkenalkan diri - Pergelutan antara tertuduh dan pasukan serbuan - Sama ada dadah adalah dalam milikan eksklusif tertuduh - Sama ada inferen dapat dibuat daripada kelakuan tertuduh bahawa tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan berkenaan dadah - Sama ada dadah adalah untuk tujuan pengedaran PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Pembawa tidak bersalah - Penafian - Pertuduhan pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Tertuduh menafikan milikan dan pengetahuan berkenaan dadah yang dijumpai di dalam satu bungkusan yang diambil dari motorsikal yang ditunggang oleh tertuduh - Tertuduh mendakwa bungkusan diberikan oleh seseorang untuk dimajukan kepada orang lain - Watak-watak yang didakwa oleh tertuduh tidak dicadangkan kepada saksi-saksi pendakwaan - Sama ada pembelaan pembawa tidak bersalah telah dibuktikan - Sama ada doktrin wilful blindness terpakai - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh adalah penafian semata-mata - Sama ada watak-watak yang ditimbulkan oleh tertuduh adalah satu rekaan semata-mata Bagi pihak pendakwaan/responden - TPR Shaharaliza Ab Razak; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kelantan Bagi pihak perayu - Cheang Chu Yong & Benedict; T/n Benedict Cheang Naziruddin & Co
[2019] 1 LNS 905	NATASRI SDN BHD v. KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI Change of category of land from agricultural to commercial and subsequent subdivision is itself a commercial transaction which constitutes an adventure in nature of a trade that enhanced the value of the land. Hence, disposal of such land is taxable as business income pursuant to s. 4(a) of the Income Tax At 1967. REVENUE LAW: Income tax - Assessment of - Business income - Adventure in the nature of trade - Whether an isolated transaction could be considered an adventure in nature of trade - Category of land changed from agricultural to commercial for purpose of carrying out development project with land subdivided - Whether conversion of status of land constitutes an adventure in nature of a trade - Whether development project enhanced value of land - Whether mere declaration of land as a fixed asset is conclusive evidence that appellant was not involved in an adventure in nature of trade - Whether disposal of land was taxable as business income pursuant to s. 4(a) of the Income Tax At 1967 For the applicant - Rajagopal Nadassan; M/s Rajagopal & Co For the respondent - Ruzaidah Yaakob & Aqmal Hakim Bahagian Litigasi
[2019] 1 LNS 1125	KMB RESOURCES SDN BHD v. OH BOON THIAM & ORS A trade mark wrongfully entered in the register of trade marks without sufficient cause or procured by fraud is defeasible and an aggrieved party is entitled to apply to expunge the said impugned trade mark from the register. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: Trade Marks - Expungement - Application to expunge from register - Infringement of trade mark 'KMB' - Wrongful entry without sufficient cause - Whether plaintiff was an aggrieved party - Whether defendant's impugned mark was procured through fraud and thus defeasible - Whether defendant had actual knowledge of plaintiff's prior use of mark - Whether plaintiff was first user of mark 'KMB' through sales since its inception - Whether defendant's impugned mark was as a result of plagiarism of plaintiff's mark - Whether registration of defendant's impugned mark ought to be expunged For the plaintiff - S Chandran & V Amareson; M/s S Chandran & Partners For the defendants - Ng Poh Tat; M/s Ng Poh Tat & Co
[2019] 1 LNS 1132	JM TEKNIK SDN BHD v. ACCURATE TECHNICS HOLDINGS SDN BHD An appeal should be struck out when provisions under the Rules of Court 2012 relating to filing of record of appeal and supplementary record of appeal are not complied with and when the appellant fails to avail himself of the relevant curing provisions within the said Rules of Court 2012. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Record of appeal - Appeal against decision of subordinate court relating to interlocutory application - Preliminary objection - Non-compliance of provisions relating to filing of record of appeal and supplementary record of appeal - Discretion of court - Failure to include all pleadings in record of appeal - Record of appeal included grounds of decision - Supplementary record of appeal filed out of time without leave - Whether non-compliance of provision under O. 55 r. 5(3) Rules of Court 2012 ('ROC') was curable - Whether sufficient notice of preliminary objection was given - Whether appellant availed himself of curing provision under O. 5 r. 1 of ROC For the appellant - Tony Ling; HC Lee and Partners For the respondent - Liew Sheau Kie; Loke, King, Goh & Partners

---

CLJ 2020 Volume 10 (Part 6)

For the purpose of imposing the annual value and assessment rates on certain holdings, the local authority could not simply enlist or add those holdings in its valuation list by way of amendment to the valuation list under s. 144 of the Local Government Act 1976. Despite the words 'or for any reason whatsoever any rateable holding has not been included in the valuation list' in s. 144(1)(a) thereof, rates could not be imposed unless the holding is first listed in the valuation list as provided for under s. 137 of the Act.
Majlis Perbandaran Seremban v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd [2020] 10 CLJ 715 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Lembaga Perkhidmatan Kewangan Labuan, being the central regulatory, supervisory and enforcement authority insofar as Labuan's function as an international business and financial service centre is concerned, is empowered to enforce all Labuan laws and this includes the issuing of leasing licenses. It follows that the Guidelines on the Establishment and Operations of Labuan Leasing Business which require the obtainment of approval for a subsequent leasing transaction is valid and patently enforceable at the Lembaga's instance; the requirement falls under the authority of the Lembaga to issue guidelines, clarify the relevant Labuan laws and is caught by the phrase 'any other matters relating to Labuan financial services' in the Guidelines.
Nabors Drilling (Labuan) Corporation v. Lembaga Perkhidmatan Kewangan Labuan [2020] 10 CLJ 732 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Syariah Court's jurisdiction is circumscribed by law and what is spelt out in s. 74(1) of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 is merely a restatement of a trite principle of law that a Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims. This said, the presumption in s. 74(2) thereof has no application to members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at religious group ('the Ahmadiyya') in the State of Selangor, because, following the 1953 trial before HRH the Sultan of Selangor and the subsequently gazetted 1998 and 2000 fatwas, an Ahmadiyya in the State of Selangor is not considered a Muslim, and he is also not, constitutionally speaking, a person 'professing the religion of Islam'. Indeed, for that matter, the 1998 and 2000 fatwas themselves have removed the legal status of the Ahmadiyya community as persons 'professing the religion of Islam'. It follows therefore that the actions of the Majlis Agama Islam Selangor in raiding the Ahmadiyya's place of worship and prohibiting them from performing their prayers thereat upon a purported violation of s. 97(2) of the Enactment ought to be subjected to a review before the High Court; and if the respondents herein have, by cogent and credible supporting evidence, showed that they are actually Ahmadiyya, then the High Court has the discretion to grant them the relief sought for, including to prohibit all syariah investigation and prosecution against them.
Ketua Pegawai Penguatkuasa Agama & Ors v. Maqsood Ahmad & Ors And Another Appeal [2020] 10 CLJ 748 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

It is not appropriate for a court to determine questions of law by relying on affidavit evidence alone, and based on that determination, strike out and summarily dispose an action, by way of O. 14A of the Rules of Court 2012, especially if the relevant facts surrounding the case are in dispute.
Su’ot Tebari v. Land Custody And Development Authority (LCDA) & Another Appeal [2020] 10 CLJ 807 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Percakapan saksi material tidak boleh diterima apabila syarat ketat di bawah s. 32(1) Akta Keterangan 1950 tidak dipenuhi dan terbukti bahawa pihak pendakwaan tidak mencuba bersungguh-sungguh untuk memastikan kehadiran saksi material tersebut, lebih-lebih lagi apabila kesalahan terhadap tertuduh melibatkan hukuman mandatori, yang sekaligus membangkitkan anggapan bertentangan di bawah s. 114(g) Akta terhadap pendakwaan.
PP lwn. Nishan Balakrishnan [2020] 10 CLJ 816 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In consenting to the dissolution of the Sabah State Legislative Assembly and signing the Proclamation of Dissolution of the State Assembly, the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah had acted within the ambit of his constitutional powers under the Sabah State Constitution; such proclamation and decision to dissolve the State Assembly are non-justiciable and are not amenable to judicial review.
Tan Sri Musa Hj Aman & Ors v. Tun Datuk Seri Hj Panglima Hj Juhar Hj Mahiruddin & Ors [2020] 10 CLJ 830 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

CLJ Article(s)

1. THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY BY COMPANIES IN GENERAL MEETINGS ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by ANDREW FERNANDEZ*, DONNA LIM**, GOH EE VON* & CARINE CHEONG* [2020] 10 CLJ(A) xi

[2020] 10 CLJ(A) xi



MALAYSIA

---

THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY BY COMPANIES IN GENERAL MEETINGS

by
ANDREW FERNANDEZ*, DONNA LIM**, GOH EE VON* & CARINE CHEONG*

Since 2017, the Section 327 of the CA 2016 requires only the chairperson to be physically present at the main venue of the meeting which shall be in Malaysia. Fully virtual meetings are conducted online without the physical presence of members and the only venue involved in the conduct of a fully virtual meeting is the 'broadcast venue'.

In the case of listed issuers, only the essential individuals and directors identified as essential individuals should be physically present at the 'broadcast venue'. The SC recommends that the essential individuals physically present at the 'broadcast venue' should not be more than eight^[5] and are envisaged typically to include the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, the company secretary, the auditor, the scrutineer and those providing audio and visual support for the virtual meeting.

Electronic Voting

The use of remote participation and electronic voting facilities allows members to exercise their rights to participate in general meetings from their home or office. Besides not requiring members to be physically present at the venue, these remote participation and electronic voting facilities further assist to expedite the voting and tabulation process. Similar to the validation process at a traditional physical general meeting, listed issuers are still required to appoint scrutineers who are to validate the votes cast at the general meeting whether on-site or remotely.

. . .

* Partner and associates of Chooi & Company + Cheang & Ariff (CCA), Advocates & Solicitors, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

** Director - Learning & Development, Corporate Services Tricor Corporate Services Sdn Bhd.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

LNS Article(s)

1. MAKE WORKING FROM HOME WORK — EMPLOYERS' CONSIDERATIONS FOR REMOTE WORKING* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Grace Chai Huey Yann [2020] 1 LNS(A) cxliv

[2020] 1 LNS(A) cxliv



MALAYSIA

---

MAKE WORKING FROM HOME WORK —
EMPLOYERS' CONSIDERATIONS FOR REMOTE WORKING*

by
Grace Chai Huey Yann

In this article, Grace Chai Huey Yann explores common issues relating to remote working arrangements implemented by employers in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Introduction

The Covid-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented impact on businesses worldwide, especially when international borders are closed and various degrees of lockdown are introduced in response to the pandemic. Since the first quarter of this eventful year, virtual working has become the option for many employers. It is safe to say that by now, Working from Home (“WFH”) is no longer a foreign concept.

Although Malaysia has entered the Recovery Movement Control Order (“RMCO”) period since June where most businesses had resumed operations subject to compliance with the relevant Standard Operating Procedure (“SOPs”) in place, the situation of the pandemic remains uncertain both locally and internationally.

. . .

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

(Disclaimer: This article is presented for information purpose only and covers legal issues in a general way. The contents are not intended to constitute advice on any specific matter and should not be relied upon as a substitute for detailed legal advice. © 2020 Shearn Delamore & Co. All rights reserved.)

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN MALAYSIA? ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Mazliza Mohamad^[i], Azlinor Sufian^[ii], Lamis Ahmad Zaky^[iii] [2020] 1 LNS(A) cxlv

[2020] 1 LNS(A) cxlv



MALAYSIA

---

WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN MALAYSIA?

by
Mazliza Mohamad^[i]
Azlinor Sufian^[ii]
Lamis Ahmad Zaky^[iii]

Abstract

As a developing country, Malaysia can be proud of the growth of the housing development to accommodate the growing need for housing. However, currently the property market has too many types of housing projects resulting in much confusion and unanswered questions for potential buyers. This is especially so when it comes to the young and first-time property buyers. The confusion caused by advertisements by developers of residential and commercial properties calls for better explanation. While both options come with positives and negatives, the vague information in circulation provided by developers cause confusion and an uneasy, or perhaps wrong decisions on the part of the property buyers. This may potentially cause the loss of money invested or life time liabilities for the property buyers. This paper discusses important legal issues and the differences between residential and commercial properties. The objective of this paper is to discuss the legal implications of the two different types of properties available in the market. 

. . .

[i] Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia mazliza@ukm.edu.my

[ii] Associate Professor, College of Law, Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia azlinorpsu@gmail.com

[iii] Legal Executive, Shearn Delamore & Co.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

3. THE NEED TO REFORM THE UK CORPORATE GOVERNANCE CODE: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Tan Wai Kit* [2020] 1 LNS(A) cxlvi

[2020] 1 LNS(A) cxlvi



MALAYSIA

---

THE NEED TO REFORM THE UK CORPORATE GOVERNANCE CODE:
A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT

by
Tan Wai Kit*

Introduction

Corporate governance addresses the objectives of companies and “it is the system whereby companies are directed and controlled”.^[1] In the UK, the regulatory framework of corporate governance incorporates both mandatory legislative rules — exemplified by the Companies Act 2006; FCA Disclosure and Transparency Rules (“DTR”) and FCA Listing Rules (“LR”), and voluntary code being the UK Corporate Governance Code (“the Code”).

The following discussion will concentrate on the Code, being a form of soft law or ‘light-touch regulation’^[2] that is characterised by:- (1) ‘a strong emphasis of companies’ self-regulation’^[3] in achieving good governance; (2) the absence of formal regulatory enforcement;^[4] (3) the inherent flexibility in terms of its application; and (4) the ease in changing the Code to reflect any up-to-date best practices, as and when appropriate. Albeit without legally binding force, various studies indicate that the soft law approach may nevertheless bring about the same effects and benefits as hard law.^[5]

. . .

* LLM (Bristol); LLB (Hons) (MMU), Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert