Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #28/2021 15 July 2021

New This Week Case(s) of the Week DR ZAKIR ABDUL KARIM NAIK v. KULA SEGARAN V MURUGESON [2021] 6 CLJ 717 TEKUN CEMERLANG SDN BHD v. VINCI CONSTRUCTION GRANDS PROJETS SDN BHD [2021] 6 CLJ 779 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2021 Volume 6 (Part 5) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

DR ZAKIR ABDUL KARIM NAIK v. KULA SEGARAN V MURUGESON [2021] 6 CLJ 717
HIGH COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
QUAY CHEW SOON JC
[SUIT NO: WA-23CY-64-11-2019]
02 APRIL 2021

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Discovery - Production of documents - Discretion of court - Whether could be ordered at any time and at any stage of proceedings - Rules of Court 2012, O. 24 rr. 3 & 7

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Discovery - Production of documents - Defamation - Defence - Pleas that plaintiff was denied entry into some countries and was 'fugitive from justice' - Delivery of documents relating thereto - Whether documents relevant and necessary - Documents not in plaintiff's possession - Whether in plaintiff's 'power' to produce - Whether to be produced - Rules of Court 2012, O. 24 rr. 3, 7 & 8

---

TEKUN CEMERLANG SDN BHD v. VINCI CONSTRUCTION GRANDS PROJETS SDN BHD [2021] 6 CLJ 779
HIGH COURT, KOTA KINABALU
WONG SIONG TUNG JC
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: BKI-24-3-1-2021]
31 MARCH 2021

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Stay of proceedings - Application for - Application to stay adjudication proceedings - Parties entered contract in Sabah - Whether firm acting and representing client in adjudication proceedings in Sabah was in practice as advocates in Sabah - Whether solicitors appointed authorised persons to act - Whether constitutional and legal to represent in adjudication proceedings - Whether parties free to appoint any representation of choice - Whether there were special circumstances to order stay of adjudication proceedings - Advocates Ordinance Sabah 1953 (Sabah) (Cap 2), ss. 15 , 16(1), (2) - Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012, s. 8(3)

---

1. CIMB Bank Berhad v. Teratai Sanjung (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2019] 1 LNS 1328 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Teratai Sanjung (M) Sdn Bhd v. CIMB Bank Berhad [Civil Suit Nos: D4-22-1027-2002 & D8-22-260-2003]

2. Lim Cheng Yung v. PP [2019] 1 LNS 1376 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PP v. Lim Cheng Yung [2017] 1 LNS 2301

Legal Network Series

[2020] 1 LNS 4	MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD v. AP BEARINGS SUPPLY SDN BHD 1. A respondent in winding-up proceedings must be given the opportunity to be heard before the Court grants a winding-up order. Where there appears to be uncertainty as to the service of cause papers on the respondent, the Court should not make an order that would adversely affect the respondent without giving the respondent the right to be heard. 2. A registered email address is personal to the holder. Service of cause papers via email is good service when the email address has been proven to be effective in the past. An email sent and received is sufficient proof of service. It is immaterial whether the contents of the email have been read by the recipient. COMPANY LAW: Winding-up - Procedure - Service of cause papers - Right to be heard - Principle of 'audi alteram partem' - Service of cause papers was to an office unrelated to respondent - Address of service was nevertheless correct - Petitioner was unable to confirm receipt of cause papers by respondent or company secretary - Whether service of cause papers was proper - Whether respondent must be given right to be heard - Whether winding-up petition ought to be struck out where there appears to be uncertainty in service of cause papers CIVIL PROCEDURE: Service - Mode of service - Effective service - Cause papers - Use of technology - Service via registered email address - Proof of service - Whether an effective service can only be properly carried out by identifying service provider and person-in-charge - Whether service of cause papers via email address was good service - Whether email sent and received was sufficient proof of service - Whether it was material for contents of email to have been read by recipient For the plaintiff - Shaiful Bahrin Mustafa (Mentioning on behalf of M/s Yong & Rakan-Rakan); M/s Yong & Rakan-Rakan For the defendant - None For the petitioner - M/s Yong & Rakan-Rakan
[2020] 1 LNS 7	NG KEE WEI v. TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD It is unnecessary for a utility provider to first prove that the consumer is responsible for damage to the meter before it can claim for loss of revenue. UTILITIES: Electricity - Consumption and usage - Claim for loss of revenue - Tampering of meter - Interference with meter causing a lower reading of electricity consumption - Whether it was incumbent on utility provider to first prove that consumer was responsible for meter tampering - Whether utility provider discharged its burden of adducing evidence on estimated usage of electricity in calculating arrears For the plaintiff - Francis Vivekanandah FP Nathar; M/s Francis Nathar & Co. For the defendant - Fathima Mohd Idris; M/s Idris & Associates
[2019] 1 LNS 1315	FAZRUL DAEM LUTH lwn. PENGERUSI LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA BUKIT AMAN & YANG LAIN Permohonan penzahiran dokumen di dalam prosiding semakan kehakiman adalah lebih terbatas berbanding dengan prosiding yang melibatkan perbicaraan penuh. Penzahiran dokumen di dalam prosiding semakan kehakiman harus relevan berhubung fakta yang dipertikaikan dan berkaitan dengan bagaimana sesuatu keputusan itu dibuat. PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penzahiran - Penzahiran dokumen - Prosiding semakan kehakiman - Prinsip dan prosedur - Sama ada dokumen yang dipohon untuk dizahirkan harus relevan berhubung fakta yang dipertikaikan - Sama ada penzahiran dokumen adalah lebih terbatas dalam prosiding semakan kehakiman - Sama ada permohonan penzahiran dokumen pemohon merupakan suatu tindakan expedisi memancing semata-mata Bagi pihak pemohon - Ebrina Zubir; T/n Maniam Nair & Co Bagi pihak responden-responden - FC Kogilambigai Muthusamy; Peguam Persekutuan; Jabatan Peguam Negara
[2019] 1 LNS 1428	RAVEENDRAN NAGAPAN lwn. PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO. BERHAD Isu-isu yang telah diputuskan secara muktamad di dalam prosiding-prosiding yang terdahulu di semua peringkat Mahkamah adalah dihalang daripada dibangkitkan di dalam tindakan baru berdasarkan prinsip res judicata. PROSEDUR SIVIL: Res judicata - Isu-isu, persamaan - Isu melibatkan tuntutan frod dan ganti rugi dari pihak insuran - Sama ada isu-isu yang dibangkitkan oleh plaintif telah diputuskan di dalam prosiding-prosiding terdahulu di semua peringkat Mahkamah - Sama ada isu yang dibangkitkan telah diputuskan secara muktamad - Sama ada plaintif adalah dihalang daripada membangkitkan isu-isu yang sama di dalam tindakan baru - Sama ada prinsip res judicata terpakai Bagi pihak plaintif - Manoharan Veerasamy; T/n Manoveera & Co Bagi pihak defendan - Vinod Dato' R. Kamalanathan; T/n Vinod Kamalanathan & Associates
[2019] 1 LNS 1479	SARAVANAN SUBRAMANIAM lwn. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA & YANG LAIN Pemohon yang merupakan seorang warganegara Malaysia dan berusia muda sewajarnya memahami Bahasa Malaysia. Justeru, kegagalan pihak berkuasa untuk menyediakan jurubahasa Tamil ketika isi kandungan perintah penggantungan terhadap perintah tahanan dibacakan kepada pemohon tidak mengakibatkan percanggahan kepada mana-mana peruntukan undang-undang dan pencabulan terhadap hak pemohon di bawah Perlembagaan Persekutuan. UNDANG-UNDANG PENTADBIRAN: Semakan kehakiman - Certiorari - Pembatalan perintah penggantungan terhadap perintah tahanan - Pemohon mendakwa isi kandungan perintah penggantungan tidak dibacakan dan diterangkan kepadanya dalam bahasa Tamil - Pemohon merupakan seorang warganegara Malaysia dan berusia muda - Sama ada pemohon sewajarnya memahami Bahasa Malaysia - Sama ada ketidak penyediaan jurubahasa Tamil merupakan percanggahan s. 6(3) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 dan pencabulan terhadap hak pemohon di bawah perkara 151(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan - Sama ada perintah penggantungan yang dikeluarkan adalah teratur Bagi pihak pemohon - Matthews Jude; T/n Naran Singh & Co Bagi pihak responden-responden - Muhamad Safuan Azhar

---

CLJ 2021 Volume 6 (Part 5)

It is the duty of the prosecution to show, upon preferring a charge of manufacturing of dangerous drugs on an accused, that at the time of the police raid the accused was engaged in the acts of 'manufacture' of the drugs as defined in s. 2 of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. In other words, it ought to be shown that the accused was arrested while carrying out the act of producing, making or refining the impugned drugs.
Chan Wei Loon v. PP & Another Appeal [2021] 6 CLJ 623 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In a land transaction, even if an immediate purchaser's title is derived under a void instrument, a person who acquires his title from the immediate purchaser is in law and in fact a subsequent purchaser. The subsequent purchaser is sheltered by the proviso to s. 340(3) to the extent that his title or interest is indefeasible so long as he is a bona fide purchaser for value.
See Leong Chye & Anor v. United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd & Another Appeal [2021] 6 CLJ 650 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Industrial Court is seized with the threshold jurisdiction to hear a dispute once the same is referred to it by the Minister under s. 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1976 and will not be deprived of it merely because the remedy of reinstatement was not pleaded or asked for at the hearing. The requirement to plead reinstatement being only material at the stage of making a representation, there is thereafter no longer any requirement for the employee to plead the remedy. The Industrial Court too, in granting monetary relief when reinstatement is not pleaded or asked for, cannot be said to have exceeded its statutory powers, as s. 30(6) of Act empowers it to include in the award 'any matter or thing which it thinks necessary or expedient'.
Sanbos (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v. Gan Soon Huat [2021] 6 CLJ 700 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The test for ordering discovery of documents is whether the documents are necessary either for disposing of the matter or for saving costs, and as stipulated by O. 24 rr. 3 & 7 of the Rules of Court 2012, they include documents "which are or have been in one's possession, custody or power", and "which may lead the applicant to a series of inquiry resulting in his obtaining information which may adversely affect his own case, or support or adversely affect another party's case". Documents which are or have been in one's power must include documents which, although not in one's possession, are within one's right to obtain from the person having actual possession. In the premises, it must follow, in the context of the present defamation suit, that the documents relating to the plaintiff's denial of entry into the United Kingdom and Canada, or to his legal challenges thereto, or to the tax and money laundering charges levelled against him by the Government of India, which the defendant sought the plaintiff to produce, are all caught by O. 24 and ought to be produced for inspection; they ought to be produced despite the complexity or immensity of the task.
Dr Zakir Abdul Karim Naik v. Kula Segaran V Murugeson [2021] 6 CLJ 717 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The words in arts. 150(6) and (8) of the Federal Constitution ('FC') are explicit on the issues of validity of laws pertaining to the making of a Proclamation of Emergency ('Proclamation') and whether a court is seized with the jurisdiction to entertain judicial review applications challenging such laws. Article 150(6) of the FC states that no legislation enacted pursuant to a Proclamation shall be invalid on the ground of inconsistency with any provision of the FC, whilst art. 150(8) states that no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any application, question or proceeding, in whatever form, on any ground, regarding the validity of a Proclamation.
Hassan Abdul Karim v. Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Dato' Hj Mahiaddin Md Yasin & Anor [2021] 6 CLJ 735 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In deciding whether a property is a matrimonial property, the court will look into the contributions of each party. 'Contribution' may not necessarily mean monetary contribution only towards the purchase of the said property but may also include contributions in kind, such as the sacrifice of a wife who resigns from her job and leaves her career to become a full-time housewife, taking care of the family.
Owen Koh Tat Gin v. Diana Lee Cheng See [2021] 6 CLJ 753 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A non-Sabah-based legal firm which is not an 'authorised person' within the meaning of s. 15 of the Advocates Ordinance (Sabah Cap. 2) and not a member of the Sabah Bar cannot represent any client in an adjudication proceeding in Sabah; to have done so is 'to practice as an advocate in Sabah' and this is prohibited by the Ordinance.
Tekun Cemerlang Sdn Bhd v. Vinci Construction Grands Projets Sdn Bhd [2021] 6 CLJ 779 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT:
   A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF LAWS AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF BANGLADESH, INDIA, MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Md Sohel Rana* Dr. Nadhratul Wardah Salman** [2021] 1 LNS(A) xci

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xci



INTERNATIONAL

---

ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT:
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF LAWS AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF BANGLADESH, INDIA, MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

by
Md Sohel Rana*
Dr. Nadhratul Wardah Salman**

ABSTRACT

Arrest, in general, refers to the taking away of a person by law enforcement agencies to question him about a crime that has already been committed or that he may have committed. An arrest can be made with a warrant of arrest or without an arrest warrant. Law enforcement agencies are a prime part of the criminal justice system in almost every country of the world. From these law enforcement agencies, the police are vested with the power to arrest someone to face the legal consequences of his misdeeds. Different countries have different approaches to arrest and in that context, arrest without a warrant also has different dimensions in Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, and the United Kingdom. The existing laws and legal framework are different according to the individual country's needs. Along with existing laws, the courts of these four countries also perform their legal obligations to make the warrantless arrest more justifiable. This paper analyses the laws, the legal framework and case decisions from all these four countries that relate to arrest without a warrant. This analysis may be useful in assisting countries in selecting the best practices available in other jurisdictions.

. . .

* Md Sohel Rana graduated from University of London with a Bachelor of Laws in 2014. He has also obtained LLM and LLB from Stamford University Bangladesh. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya, Malaysia. His areas of research interest include Criminal Law and the Criminal Justice System, Law of Tort, Law of Contract, International Law and Human Rights. E-mail: sohel1814@gmail.com.

** Dr. Nadhratul Wardah Salman graduated with a Bachelor of Laws from the International Islamic University, Malaysia in 1995 and subsequently pursued Master in Sports Policy at Leeds Metropolitan University, UK. She went on to do her Master of Laws (LL.M) at the University of Malaya, Malaysia. In 2005, she completed her Ph.D. in Sports Law at Manchester Metropolitan University, UK. She is currently serving as a Senior Lecturer as well as holding an administrative position as the Deputy Dean at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya. Her areas of teaching and research include Sports Law, Law of Tort, Malaysian Legal System, Fundamental Liberties and Community Engagement. E-mail: wardah@um.edu.my.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. TOWARD A MAQASID-BASED JURISPRUDENCE OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Mohammad Hashim Kamali [2021] 1 LNS(A) xcii

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xcii



MALAYSIA

---

TOWARD A MAQASID-BASED JURISPRUDENCE OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT*

by
Mohammad Hashim Kamali

The higher purposes (maqasid) of shariah offer the prospects of constructing a new genre of Islamic jurisprudence that may be termed as the 'jurisprudence of human development' (JHD) with fresh theoretical focus on bringing about a cultural revival in Muslim societies. The effort so undertaken is justified due partly to a certain disconnect Muslim societies have experienced with their history of the efflorescence of learning and civilisational achievements. With the spread of secular society and civilisation that engulfed the Muslim countries under colonial rule and ever since, Muslims have experienced denigration and decline. The secular humanist globalisation only made matters worse. Globalisation promised a brave new world of freedom and wealth, of porous boundaries and inclusiveness, and claimed an irreversible march toward a universal civilisation. Profit-maximising liberal capitalism as its principal tool infiltrated the economy, education, mass media and culture almost everywhere.

. . .

* 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.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert