Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #11/2021 18 March 2021

New This Week Case(s) of the Week JAGDIS SINGH BANTA SINGH & ANOR v. RETURN 2 GREEN SDN BHD [2021] 3 CLJ 355 PP lwn. AIMAN ABDULLAH QASEM BARQOQ [2021] 3 CLJ 427 JUDICIAL QUOTES  Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2021 Volume 3 (Part 3) Articles CLJ Article(s) LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

JAGDIS SINGH BANTA SINGH & ANOR v. RETURN 2 GREEN SDN BHD [2021] 3 CLJ 355
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
LAU BEE LAN JCA; RAVINTHRAN PARAMAGURU JCA; MOHD SOFIAN RAZAK JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02(IM)-1101-06-2019]
16 DECEMBER 2020

COMPANY LAW: Liquidators - Application for removal - Allegation that liquidator acted unfairly by giving preference to one creditor - Whether prior leave of court required for removal - Whether removal ought to be for benefit of all creditors - Whether reasonable to obtain support of all creditors and contributories to remove liquidator - Whether liquidator may be removed only on 'cause shown' - Whether liquidator's impartiality and objectivity in conduct of duty questionable - Whether ought to be removed - Companies Act 2016, s. 482(2)

---

PP lwn. AIMAN ABDULLAH QASEM BARQOQ [2021] 3 CLJ 427
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, SHAH ALAM
AB KARIM AB RAHMAN H
[PERBICARAAN JENAYAH NO: 45A-59-07-2018]
14 SEPTEMBER 2020

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 39B(1)(a) - Pengedaran dadah - Dakwaan - Sama ada tumbuhan hijau kering yang menjadi hal perkara pertuduhan dadah berbahaya bawah Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada dadah berbahaya dalam milikan tertuduh - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan barang kes adalah dadah berbahaya - Cabaran terhadap kaedah ahli kimia - Sama ada analisis yang dijalankan oleh ahli kimia konklusif - Sama ada rantai barang kes terputus - Sama ada tertuduh dilepaskan atau dibebaskan

---

“On matters in which the Yang Di Pertuan Agong exercises his executive powers using his own discretion, for example on the appointment of the Prime Minister, this exercise of powers might not be justiciable. However on matters of pardon where the YDPA acts on the advice of the Pardons Board and the Attorney General, this power is justiciable. The granting of pardon in Malaysia cannot be regarded as royal pardon unlike in a country like England where the pardon by the Monarch is not subject to any restrictions and given as a royal prerogative.”

“The normal mode of challenging the exercise of executive powers is by way of judicial review. However the courts have ruled in a number of cases that in a case where the performance of public duty affects private rights the action can be begun by a writ.”

“The plaintiff is taking up this action as a lawyer and a citizen of Malaysia who is aggrieved by the full pardon granted by the YDPA. The plaintiff has a locus standi to file this claim by way of writ to obtain a declaration on the validity of the full pardon granted to the second defendant. A full trial with witnesses is necessary for the determination of the issues emanating from this suit. As such the court dismissed the application of both the defendants to strike out the claim under O. 18 r. 19 of the Rules.” – per Akhtar Tahir J in Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz v. Lembaga Pengampunan Wilayah Persekutuan & Anor [2021] 1 CLJ 94

---

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 2186	SUDONG SDN BHD lwn. MENTERI SUMBER MANUSIA MALAYSIA & YANG LAIN 1. Tawaran pengambilan semula bekerja yang dibuat oleh majikan harus sebenar dan munasabah dan dapat menyelesaikan permasalahan yang timbul antara majikan dan pekerja. Apabila tawaran yang dibuat adalah tidak sebenar dan tidak munasabah dan telah ditolak oleh pekerja, maka pertikaian sedemikian mewujudkan satu skop untuk pemberian relif yang wajar dirujuk kepada Mahkamah Perusahaan. 2. Isu penamatan kerja secara konstruktif adalah melibatkan isu undang-undang dan wajar dipertimbangkan serta diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Perusahaan. UNDANG-UNDANG PENTADBIRAN: Semakan kehakiman - Certiorari - Permohonan oleh majikan untuk membatalkan keputusan Menteri Sumber Manusia yang telah merujuk representasi pekerja ke Mahkamah Perusahaan - Syarikat telah membuat tawaran pengambilan semula bekerja tetapi ditolak oleh pekerja - Sama ada terdapat sebarang skop untuk pemberian relif yang wajar dirujuk kepada Mahkamah Perusahaan apabila pekerja menolak tawaran pengambilan semula bekerja - Sama ada tawaran pengambilan semula bekerja yang dibuat oleh majikan adalah munasabah - Sama ada tawaran yang dibuat oleh majikan dapat menyelesaikan permasalahan yang timbul antara majikan dan pekerja UNDANG-UNDANG PENTADBIRAN: Semakan kehakiman - Certiorari - Permohonan oleh majikan untuk membatalkan keputusan Menteri Sumber Manusia ('Menteri') yang telah merujuk representasi pekerja ke Mahkamah Perusahaan - Penamatan kerja secara konstruktif - Sama ada isu penamatan kerja secara konstruktif melibatkan isu undang-undang dan adalah wajar dipertimbangkan serta diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Perusahaan - Sama ada Menteri perlu memberikan alasan bagi keputusan untuk merujuk representasi ke Mahkamah Perusahaan - Sama ada representasi yang dibuat adalah berdasarkan undang-undang, munasabah dan mengambilkira perkara-perkara yang relevan Bagi pihak pemohon - Foo Siew Li & Tan Su Ning; T/n Skrine Bagi pihak responden 1 & 2 - SFC Noor Akmal Mustafa Kamal; Peguam Kanan Persekutuan; Jabatan Peguam Negara Bagi pihak responden 3 - Mohamed Ali Mohamed
[2018] 1 LNS 2202	DALAM PERKARA: EDWIN CASSIAN NAGAPPAN @ MARIE; EX-PARTE: LEMBAGA KUMPULAN WANG SIMPANAN PEKERJA Apabila suatu penghakiman dimasukkan ke atas dua atau lebih penghutang penghakiman, maka tanggungan penghutang-penghutang penghakiman tersebut adalah secara bersesama dan berasingan. Justeru, prosiding kebankrapan yang dimulakan ke atas dua atau lebih penghutang penghakiman untuk jumlah tunggakan penghakiman yang sama adalah wajar diketepikan. KEBANKRAPAN: Pengenepian - Permohonan untuk - Pengenepian notis kebankrapan dan petisyen pemiutang - Pertikaian berkenaan jumlah tuntutan dalam notis kebankrapan - Tindakan kebankrapan dimulakan terhadap beberapa penghutang penghakiman untuk jumlah tunggakan penghakiman yang sama - Sama ada dua penghutang penghakiman perlu membayar jumlah penghakiman yang sama - Sama ada tanggungan secara bersesama dan berasingan adalah wajar Bagi pihak pemiutang penghakiman/perayu - Afifi Ahmad & Siti Masturah; T/n Azrul Afifi & Azuan Bagi pihak penghutang penghakiman/responden - Nadaraja Gopalakrishnan; T/n Lavina Dell Akbar Tee & Partners
[2018] 1 LNS 2203	PER: FOO LEE KHEAN; EX-PARTE: CHIN BEE & SONS SDN BHD 1. Pemiutang penghakiman boleh memulakan prosiding kebankrapan untuk menuntut jumlah yang dinyatakan di dalam penghakiman persetujuan setelah penghutang penghakiman memungkiri terma-terma penghakiman persetujuan yang lain. Justeru, pemiutang penghakiman tidak perlu memohon kebenaran mahkamah terlebih dahulu sebelum memulakan prosiding kebankrapan untuk menuntut jumlah penghakiman tersebut. 2. Penolong kanan pendaftar mempunyai bidang kuasa untuk mendengar petisyen pemiutang dan mengendalikan notis kebankrapan. KEBANKRAPAN: Pengenepian - Permohonan untuk - Pengenepian notis kebankrapan dan petisyen pemiutang - Prosiding kebankrapan berasaskan penghakiman persetujuan - Prosiding kebankrapan dimulakan untuk menuntut jumlah yang dinyatakan di dalam penghakiman persetujuan - Penghutang penghakiman telah memungkiri terma-terma penghakiman persetujuan yang lain - Sama ada notis kebankrapan adalah teratur - Sama ada pemiutang penghakiman perlu mendapatkan kebenaran mahkamah terlebih dahulu sebelum memulakan prosiding kebankrapan KEBANKRAPAN: Amalan dan prosedur - Permintaan untuk notis kebankrapan - Nama peguam tidak dicatit di bahagian tandatangan peguam - Sama ada permintaan untuk notis kebankrapan adalah sah MAHKAMAH: Bidang kuasa - Pendaftar - Bidang kuasa penolong kanan pendaftar untuk mendengar prosiding kebankrapan - Sama ada penolong kanan pendaftar mempunyai kuasa untuk mendengar petisyen pemiutang dan mengendalikan notis kebankrapan - Akta Kebankrapan 1967, ss. 90(1), (2)(b) - Kaedah-Kaedah Kebankrapan, k. 5 - Arahan Amalan No. 3/1993 Bagi pihak penghutang penghakiman/responden - Wong Chun Keat; T/n Wong & Wong (Bagi kedua-dua kes: WA-29NCC-6249-12/2016 & 29NCC-6250-12/2016) Bagi pihak pemiutang penghakiman/perayu - T Gunaseelan & Keshvinjeet; T/n Gunaseelan & Associates
[2019] 1 LNS 908	PP v. VENUS EMPIRE ENTERPRISE & ORS 1. A bank being the owner of a vehicle under a hire-purchase agreement, is entitled to file a third party application to claim the said vehicle seized due to the hirer's involvement in unlawful activities provided it is proven that the bank, being a bona fide third party, had no knowledge of the hirer's unlawful activities. In such circumstances, the vehicle should be returned to the bank which has a legitimate legal interest in the said vehicle. 2. Victims of a scam who were induced into investing their monies by fraudulent claims made by others have a legitimate legal interest in the said money. In such circumstances, the concept of wilful blindness has no application and the monies should be returned to the victims. CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing And Proceeds Of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Section 56(1) - Forfeiture of property where there is no prosecution - Hirer handed over vehicle to used car dealer with intention to sell vehicle - Investigation revealed vehicle was later acquired by a purchaser using proceeds of an illegal deposit taking activity - Whether hirer was privy to the events subsequent to handing over of vehicle to used car dealer - Whether hirer has legitimate legal interest in vehicle CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing And Proceeds Of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Section 61 - Vehicle seized was subject matter of a hire purchase agreement - Bank being owner of vehicle filed third party application to claim for return of vehicle - Bona fide third parties - Hirer allegedly involved in an illegal deposit taking activity - Whether bank was privy to and had knowledge of hirer's involvement in illegal activity - Whether bank has legitimate legal interest in vehicle - Whether vehicle ought to be returned to bank CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing And Proceeds Of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 ('AMALTFA') - Section 61 - Third party claims over monies paid into a bank account intended to be an investment sum - Bona fide third parties - Claimants were victims of a scam perpetrated by others - Claimants were induced to invest their monies by fraudulent claims made by others - Whether concept of wilful blindness applied - Whether claimants have legitimate legal interest in money - Whether requirements under 61(4)(a) & (b) AMALTFA fulfilled For the applicant - Fadzilah Begum Abd Ghani, Public Prosecutor; Attorney General's Chambers For the respondent Maybank Islamic Berhad - Zainurulfarah Zainol; M/s Shahinuddin & Ranjit For the 7th respondent - Ravi Nekoo & Parvinder Kaur; M/s Hakem Arabi & Ass
[2019] 1 LNS 1032	SOUTHVILLE CITY SDN BHD v. LIM SEONG HIN & ANOR 1. The commencement date for calculation of damages for late delivery of vacant possession starts from the date of payment of booking fees although the clauses in the sale and purchase agreement ('SPA') has stipulated that the time for delivery of vacant possession starts from the date of SPA. 2. Solicitors designated by a developer in respect of sale and purchase of a property are acting for the developer and the booking fees accepted by the solicitors are on behalf of the developer. Payment of booking fees is a valid consideration and thus a contract for sale and purchase is validly formed upon payment of such booking fees to the designated solicitors. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Certiorari - Application to quash decision of Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims ('Tribunal') - Developer dissatisfied on commencement date of calculation of damages for late delivery - Tribunal awarded damages based on date of payment of booking fees instead of date of sale and purchase agreement ('SPA') - Clauses in SPA stipulates that time for delivery of vacant possession to start from date of SPA - Whether calculation for damages begins from date of payment of booking fees or date of SPA - Whether Tribunal acted outside its jurisdiction when it decided that calculation of damages commences from date of payment of booking fees - Whether decision of Tribunal was tainted with any illegality, irrationality or unreasonableness CONTRACT: Formation - Sale and purchase of land - Housing developers - Sale and purchase agreement entered a few days after payment of booking fees - Booking fees accepted by panel of solicitors appointed by developer - Whether booking fees accepted by solicitors on behalf of developer - Whether designated solicitors were acting for developer - Whether contract between developer and purchaser was validly formed upon payment of booking fees by purchaser - Whether absence of housing developer's license and advertisement and sales permit at the time when booking fees were paid could affect validity of contract For the applicant - Yap Bing Yew; M/s Justin Voon Chooi & Wing For the 1st respondent - Sharon Tan; M/s Ismail Sabri Wee & Wong For the 2nd respondent - Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah; Kementerian Kesejahteraan Bandar & Kerajaan Tempatan

---

CLJ 2021 Volume 3 (Part 3)

The Syariah Court may only exercise jurisdiction over a person when it has over him both jurisdiction ratione personae, which is contingent on the person's legal persona, and jurisdiction ratione materiae or subject matter jurisdiction. Absent these jurisdictions the Syariah Court is not empowered to exercise any power over a person and if exercised would be ultra vires the Federal Constitution (FC). This said, in cases where a person's religious status of whether he is a Muslim or not is in dispute, a distinction needs be drawn between cases where one 'no longer professes the religion of Islam' and one who 'never professes the religion of Islam'; only the former which refers to renunciation cases is justiciable before the Syariah Court; the latter, which necessarily engages the issue of one's identity and legal status, must fall within the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. There is also a notable difference between the terms 'profess and practise' and 'profess' as used in art. 11(1) of the FC and Item 1 of the State List of the FC respectively; 'profess' per se is a constitutional term that is justiciable before the Civil Court, whilst 'profess and practise' is a question of faith and dogma and falls within the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court by virtue of art. 121(1A) of the FC.
Rosliza Ibrahim v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor [2021] 3 CLJ 301 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A liquidator in administering a liquidation must conduct his office with due despatch and must not succumb to any unfitness or misconduct or any tardy or lackadaisical attitude in administering or recovering the assets of the wound up company. This said, to apply to remove a 'faulting' liquidator under s. 482(b) of the Companies Act 2016, a creditor need not obtain the approval of all the other creditors. Further, and whilst an application to remove a liquidator under s. 482(b) is conditional on a 'cause shown', such cause may have been shown by the liquidator's conduct in improperly surrendering a valuable asset to an unsecured creditor, to the prejudice of all other unsecured creditors; such a conduct is unconscionable and smacks of partiality, and hence, may aptly warrant a removal.
Jagdis Singh Banta Singh & Anor v. Return 2 Green Sdn Bhd [2021] 3 CLJ 355 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

(i) A claim for specific performance of the insolvent company's obligation to pay will not be successful as that would not only amount to undue preference but would also be futile in light of the inability of the company to pay; more so where damages are an adequate remedy.
(ii) The claim for specific performance by the 'first degree' shareholder and the 'second degree' shareholder against the insolvent company was barred by the 'reflective loss' principle which was rooted in the prevention of double recovery arising from concurrent claims, herein, against the loss-suffering company.
Agathisfour Sdn Bhd v. Papparich Group Sdn Bhd [2021] 3 CLJ 371 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

There is a fundamental duty for an attending doctor to advise patients and their family members regarding the necessary procedure or treatment to be adopted bearing in mind the patient's health condition, and failure to do may amount to a breach of duty of care, especially when there is a failure to demonstrate the urgency to subject the patient to further examination resulting in the aggravation of the patient's condition. This notwithstanding, any tardiness on the part of the patient's family members to bring the patient to a hospital, especially in a situation where the plaintiff's condition was a cause for concern, may make the family members guilty of contributing to the injuries suffered, and may result in a finding of contributory negligence on their part.
Ahmad Thaqif Amzar Ahmad Huzairi v. Kuala Terengganu Specialist Hospital Sdn Bhd & Ors [2021] 3 CLJ 389 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Di mana seseorang tertuduh dituduh dengan pertuduhan di bawah s. 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 kerana 'mengedar cathinone di dalam tumbuhan seberat 23,756 gram', adalah menjadi tanggungjawab pendakwaan untuk membuktikan berat sebenar cathonine di dalam daun-daun tumbuhan berkenaan, dan ini menuntut supaya bahan-bahan tumbuhan tersebut dianalisa seratus peratus agar dapat dipastikan jumlah bahan aktif cathonine yang ada padanya. Dalam ertikata lain, adalah tidak memadai untuk pendakwaan untuk hanya membuktikan bahawa bahan-bahan tumbuhan adalah seberat 23,756 gram dan terdapat bahan aktif cathonine yang tidak dipastikan kuantitinya di dalamnya - seperti yang berlaku dalam kes ini. Ujian dadah yang dijalankan sedemikian rupa adalah tidak konklusif dan tidak boleh diterima oleh mahkamah.
PP lwn. Aiman Abdullah Qasem Barqoq [2021] 3 CLJ 427 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

CLJ Article(s)

1. TECHNOLOGICAL PROTECTION MEASURES: ANTI-CIRCUMVENTION AND THE COPYRIGHT ACT 1987 ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by JEREMIAH RAIS* [2021] 3 CLJ(A) v

[2021] 3 CLJ(A) v



MALAYSIA

---

TECHNOLOGICAL PROTECTION MEASURES:
ANTI-CIRCUMVENTION AND THE COPYRIGHT ACT 1987

by
JEREMIAH RAIS*

Introduction

An increasingly tech-savvy society with widespread access to affordable computers and internet connectivity has fostered the creation of digitalised works and facilitated our ability to duplicate and distribute such works across borders seamlessly. While this has undoubtedly accelerated the dissemination of knowledge and encouraged intellectual creation,^[1] technology has also proven to be a double-edged sword which poses challenges to the monitoring and enforcement of copyright, particularly with the prevalence of peer-to-peer file sharing platforms and streaming websites.^[2]

To counteract this, copyright owners have resorted to technological protection measures ('TPMs') which act as 'virtual fences' around their works to combat piracy in the digital age.^[3] Coupled with these 'virtual fences', copyright owners in various jurisdictions also enjoy an additional layer of protection in the form of anti-circumvention laws that illegalise the circumvention of TPMs. Against this backdrop, this paper will seek to unravel the scope of protection afforded to TPMs under s. 36A of the Copyright Act 1987 ('CA 1987') and to consider its adequacy in light of Anglo-American law.

. . .

* Advocate and Solicitor (Malaya), Advocate (Sarawak), Barrister-at-Law (Middle Temple)

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

LNS Article(s)

1. KEISTIMEWAAN TANAH-TANAH GERAN (FIRST GRADE) DI NEGERI PULAU PINANG ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Charanjit Singh a/l Mahinder Singh* [2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxiv

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxiv



MALAYSIA

---

KEISTIMEWAAN TANAH-TANAH GERAN (FIRST GRADE) DI NEGERI PULAU PINANG

by
Charanjit Singh a/l Mahinder Singh*

LATAR BELAKANG

1. Artikel ini akan membincangkan tentang status Geran (First Grade) di negeri Pulau Pinang.

PENDAHULUAN

2. Secara asasnya, undang-undang tanah di Malaysia adalah diselia di bawah Kanun Tanah Negara [Akta 828] yang mana secara ringkasnya, Akta 828 telah digubal dengan tujuan untuk menyelia undang-undang yang berhubung dengan tanah, pendaftaran hakmilik tanah dan urusanurusan berkenaan perkara ini termasuk kutipan hasil. Preamble Akta 828 menjelaskan perkara ini seperti yang berikut:

An act to amend and consolidate the laws relating to land and land tenure, the registration of title to land and of dealings therewith and the collection of revenue therefrom within the States of Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor, Terengganu and the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, and for purposes connected therewith.

. . .

*Pegawai Undang-Undang Negeri Pulau Pinang, bekas Timbalan Pendakwa Raya & Penggubal Undang-Undang Parlimen, Jabatan Peguam Negara, Peguambela & Peguamcara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya, Barrister at Law; Lincoln's Inn, LLB (First Class Honours) Northumbria at Newcastle.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. ENFORCING CIVIL JUDGMENTS IN MALAYSIA: WAYS AND CHALLENGES ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Haniwarda Yaakob* [2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxv

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxv



MALAYSIA

---

ENFORCING CIVIL JUDGMENTS IN MALAYSIA:
WAYS AND CHALLENGES

by
Haniwarda Yaakob*

Introduction

Parties commencing civil litigation primarily aim at obtaining a final judgment which can be later enforced against the losing party. At the end of a civil proceeding, the presiding judge will deliver a final judgment. The term 'judgment' is used when the findings of the court brings an end or closure to the proceeding (Abu Backer 2019). Judgments or decisions of the court concerning procedural issues that do not dispose of the action are termed as 'orders' (Abu Backer 2019). After final judgment is obtained, the doctrine of res judicata prevents parties from litigating the action again (Yeazell et al. 2017).

Order 42 r. 1(1) of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC) require judgments for actions heard in open court to be pronounced in open court. If the action is heard in chambers, judgment for the case may be delivered in chambers or in open court if the judge thinks fit (O. 42 r. 1(1) ROC). In Chia Yan Teck v. Ng Swee Kiat [2001] 4 CLJ 61; [2001] 4 AMR 3293, it was held that a judgment is effective upon its pronouncement in open court.

. . .

* Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor. Email: hani75@ukm.edu.my.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

3. LESBIANS AND GAYS ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND ISLAMIC LAW ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Muhammad Imran Bin Razali* Assoc. Prof. Dr. Shahrul Mizan bin Ismail** [2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxvi

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxvi



International

---

LESBIANS AND GAYS ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND ISLAMIC LAW

by
Muhammad Imran Bin Razali*
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Shahrul Mizan bin Ismail**

ABSTRACT

The issue of homosexuality is a never-ending debate as some societies consider homosexuality as unnatural and immoral. Islam is one of the religions that prohibits homosexuality. Several Islamic countries practising Sharia Law view it as a crime which is punishable by death in accordance with Hudud Law. On the other hand, liberal Muslims argue that homosexuality fall under natural rights which demand respect and protection. This article examines the position of homosexuality under the International Human Rights Law and Islamic law while simultaneously investigating the clash between the two. This study aims to explain the discrepancies between the two laws on homosexuality to avoid further misconception within society. The research is non-doctrinal and is qualitative in nature. The researcher will also analyse the existing laws and cases pertaining to this issue. The findings of this article show that the western world sees Islam as a religion that has to adapt to modern society without discriminating against sexual and emotional interests. Besides that, homosexuals have always existed in every community, society and even every part of the world. Therefore, it is vital to understand the position of homosexuality in relation to both laws as every human being has the right to protection against any form of oppression.

. . .

*Muhammad Imran bin Razali is currently a Postgraduate Student in the Faculty of Law at the National University of Malaysia (UKM). He obtained his Postgraduate Diploma in Public Management Programme (DPA) at National Institute of Public Administration (INTAN) in 2018. In 2016, he obtained his Diploma in Administration, Islamic Judiciary (DAIJ) at International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). He also obtained his Bachelor Degree in Sharia with Law in 2014 and Diploma in Sharia with Law in 2011 at Selangor International Islamic University (SIIUC).

**Dr. Shahrul Mizan Bin Ismail is an Associate Professor of Law at the Faculty of Law, National University of Malaysia (UKM) in Selangor, Malaysia. He obtained his Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) in 2003. In 2004, he was called to the Malaysian Bar and was admitted as Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya. He later continued his studies at the postgraduate level at the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, and obtained his Master of Laws (LL.M) specializing in International Human Rights Law and International Criminal Justice & Armed Conflict (minor specialization) in 2006. In 2013, Dr. Shahrul Mizan obtained his Doctor of Philosophy in Law (Ph.D) from the National University of Malaysia (UKM), specializing once again in the field of International Human Rights Law.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

4. GROWING PRO BONO PARTICIPATION^{+ [Read excerpt]}
   by Jessica Hatherall* Anna Jacobs** [2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxvii

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xxxvii



AUSTRALIA

---

GROWING PRO BONO PARTICIPATION⁺

by
Jessica Hatherall*
Anna Jacobs**

Jessica Hatherall and Anna Jacobs from the Australian Pro Bono Centre talk about the expansion of the National Pro Bono Target, the resources now available to legal professionals, and the benefits of engaging in pro bono work.

In 2012 research found that at least a quarter of all Australians will experience a legal problem substantial enough to require a lawyer every year.^[1]

While 3.24 million people live below the poverty line in Australia (13.6 per cent of the Australian population)^[2] only eight per cent of Australians are able to access legal aid,^[3] leaving many people without basic legal help. The recent bushfire and Covid-19 crises have also significantly increased the number of Australians requiring legal assistance. Now, more than ever, it is vital for lawyers to provide pro bono legal services to improve access to justice.

. . .

+Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos Summer 2020, Issue 258.

*Head of Policy and Strategy, Australian Pro Bono Centre.

**Secondee Policy & Project Officer, Australian Pro Bono Centre.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert