CASE(S) OF THE WEEK
BERSIH & ADIL NETWORK SDN BHD & ORS v.
TAN SRI DATO' HJ MAHIADDIN MD YASIN & ANOR;
KHAIRIL NIZAM KHIRUDIN & ORS (INTERVENERS) AND ANOTHER CASE [2022] 7 CLJ 905
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
AHMAD KAMAL MD SHAHID J
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NOS: WA-24-6-02-2021 & WA-24-22-04-2021]
04 JULY 2022
The power to interpret constitutional provisions is not exclusive to the Federal Court. Under the constitutional scheme, the Federal Court is generally a court of last resort for all constitutional questions. It is only in a narrow category of exceptional cases - those expressly stipulated in art. 128(1) of the Federal Constitution - that such questions must be determined by the Federal Court at first instance.
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction - High Court - Reference of constitutional questions to Federal Court - Power to interpret constitutional provisions - Whether constitutional questions within ambit of Federal Court's jurisdiction and determination - Whether applications fell within jurisdiction of High Court - Whether application to refer constitutional questions could be allowed - Federal Constitution, art. 128 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 84
APPEAL UPDATES
-
Hemraj & Co Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd & Ors [2022] 7 CLJ 169 affirming the High Court case of Tenaga Nasional Berhad v. Hemraj & Co Sdn Bhd & Ors [Guaman No. WA-22NCVC-826-12/2016]
-
Teong Teck Lian ½ Bhg & Anor v. Pentadbir Tanah, Johor Bahru [2021] 1 LNS 828 overruling in part the High Court case of Teong Teck Lian ½ Bhg & Anor v. Pentadbir Tanah, Johor Bahru [Civil No. JA-15-7-02/2018]
LATEST CASES
Legal Network Series
|
[2021] 1 LNS 782
|
LOH TECK WAH v. FINTREE CAPITAL SDN BHD; PNL CAPITAL SDN BHD & ORS (INTERVENERS)
The existence of other legal proceedings or issues relating to the legality of a company's business are not factors to be considered in applying for a judicial management order under ss. 405 and 406 of the Companies Act 2016. The possibility of an alternative remedy by itself is not a ground for the court to dismiss a judicial management application. Much would depend on the facts of the case and, more importantly, whether the purposes as stated in ss. 405 and 406 of the Companies Act 2016 have been fulfilled.
COMPANY LAW: Business and schemes - Judicial management order - Application filed by creditor of company - Whether application for judicial management should be separated from other legal proceedings - Whether alleged issue of company's business being illegal was a matter for court to take into consideration - Whether possibility of an alternative remedy was a ground for dismissal of judicial management application - Companies Act 2016, ss. 404 & 405
COMPANY LAW: Judicial management - Application for - Setting aside of judicial management order - Setting aside premised on grounds that applicant had no locus standi to commence application for judicial management order - Whether applicant was a creditor - Whether creditor advanced money to company or its shareholder - Whether application for judicial management was filed for creditor's collateral purposes - Whether application for judicial management was bona fide - Whether interim judicial manager had acted in concert with or on favour of applicant
- For the applicant in enclosure 1 - De Zhen Shim & Hazwan Lee; M/s Yeoh Shim Siow & Lay Kuan
- For the interim judicial manager - Himahlini Ramalingam; M/s Himahlini & Co
- For the 1st–5th interveners (PNL Group of Companies) & applicant in enclosure 64 - Yap Boon Hau, Christina Lau & Fang Kang Lun; M/s Mah-Kamariyah & Philip Koh
- For the 6th intervener (Liew Chia Soon) & applicant in enclosure 24 - Gregory Das & Dawn Wong; M/s Steven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership
- For the 7th intervener (Venessa Kang Mooi Chin) - Gopi Seshadari; M/s Gopi Seshadari
|
|
[2021] 1 LNS 783
|
IN RE: SINEO ENTERPRISE SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION)
In the absence of any concluded fee agreement between a chargee bank and a liquidator, the latter is not entitled to charge his remuneration, legal expense and costs of his discharge from the proceeds of the sale of the charged property or assets on a realisation basis in the event the charged property is successfully sold. The liquidator is, however, entitled to reasonable remuneration for his services in winding up the company, subject to bills tendered to the court for a full taxation exercise, which shall be payable only if there are surplus proceeds of the sale of the charged property or asset after the entire debt due to the chargee bank has been settled in full from the proceeds as and when they are eventually realised.
COMPANY LAW: Winding up - Liquidator - Remuneration - Discharge - Liquidator applied to be released as one of joint liquidators - Determination of remuneration of liquidator and legal expenses and costs of discharge - Absence of any concluded fee agreement with chargee bank on remuneration of fees - Liquidator contended that remuneration was predicated on a realisation of charged asset - Whether there was any arrangement on liquidators remuneration by chargee bank - Whether liquidator was entitled to reasonable remuneration for his efforts and work done on behalf of court - Whether court has jurisdiction to determine remuneration of liquidator during his tenure as joint liquidation - Whether liquidator could have recourse to proceeds of sale of a charged property which has yet been sold for liquidator's remuneration and costs of discharge - Companies Act 2016, s. 479
- For the applicant joint liquidator - Navamalar; M/s Anad & Noraini
- For RHB Bank Berhad - Mong Chun Seng & Chia Oh Sheng; M/s Lee Hishamuddin, Allen & Gledhill
|
|
[2021] 1 LNS 784
|
GLORY SERAPHINE LAW v. PHILLIP JOHN DEAN
Access by a non-custodial parent to his or her child is regarded as the basic right of the child rather than the right of the parent. To deprive access of a non-custodial parent to his or her child is akin to depriving the child of an important contribution to the child's emotional and material growth in the long term. The court should be slow to deprive a parent of all contact with or access to his or her child unless he or she is not a fit and proper person or if such access by the non-custodial parent would harm the welfare of the child.
FAMILY LAW: Children - Custody - Respondent husband applied for reasonable access and to be allowed communication with child - Whether welfare of child is paramount consideration - Whether there should be contact with non-custodial parent in interest of a child's emotional health - Whether access to and communication with child by respondent husband would harm child - Whether respondent husband's attempt for reconciliation with wife could constitute any harm to interest and welfare of child
- For the petitioner - Siti Rasnih Salim; M/s Nordin & Lam
- For the respondent - Kevin Khor; M/s LV Partners
|
|
[2020] 1 LNS 1204
|
PP lwn. ABD RAHMAN AHMAD & SATU LAGI
Berat dan cara dadah disembunyikan membolehkan mahkamah membuat inferens yang munasabah bahawa tertuduh mempunyai niat untuk mengelak daripada dikesan oleh pihak berkuasa kerana mengedarkan dadah-dadah tersebut dan pengetahuan tertuduh mengenai dadah-dadah yang disembunyikan tersebut.
UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Dadah berbahaya - Pengedaran - Dadah dijumpai dalam poket pakaian tertuduh dan rumah tertuduh - Tertuduh menyimpan pelbagai jenis dadah dalam kuantiti yang banyak - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai kawalan dan jagaan ke atas dadah - Sama ada anggapan bawah s. 37(d) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 terpakai - Sama ada dadah yang dibawa dan disimpan oleh tertuduh adalah untuk tujuan pengedaran - Sama ada kes prima facie telah dibuktikan
PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Keraguan yang munasabah - Kesalahan mengedar dadah - Sama ada dapatan pengedaran afirmatif memerlukan keterangan perbuatan yang terang dan nyata - Sama ada tertuduh hanya memiliki dadah secara pasif sahaja - Sama ada anggapan milikan dan pengetahuan telah dipatahkan - Sama ada dakwaan tertuduh berkenaan kewujudan pengedar sebenar telah dibuktikan - Sama ada notis alcontara yang cukup telah diberikan
PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Pembawa tidak bersalah - Pertuduhan pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Dadah dijumpai di dalam beg yang dibawa oleh tertuduh daripada kereta - Tertuduh mendakwa dadah telah diletakkan oleh orang yang meminjam kereta - Sama ada pembelaan pembawa tidak bersalah timbul apabila tertuduh telah gagal memeriksa kandungan beg - Sama ada tertuduh sengaja menutup matanya kepada perkara yang mencurigakan mengenai isi kandungan beg - Sama ada inferens dapat dibuat bahawa tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan tentang dadah di dalam beg
- Bagi pihak Pendakwaan - Mohd Yazid Sairi Shafiq Mahadi, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Jabatan Kastam Diraja
- Bagi pihak tertuduh pertama - Iskandar Shah Ibrahim; T/n Iskandar Shah & Co
- Bagi pihak tertuduh kedua - Azamuddin Aziz; T/n Azamuddin & Co
|
|
[2020] 1 LNS 957
|
PP lwn. MOHAMMAD HABIBUL HASSAN KHAN
1. Seorang warden universiti tidak tergolong dalam pegawai-pegawai yang diperuntukkan bawah s. 37B(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952. Justeru, pernyataan yang dibuat oleh tertuduh di hadapan warden universiti bahawa barang dalam milikannya adalah dadah relevan dan boleh diterima sekadar untuk menunjukkan pengetahuan tertuduh mengenai dadah tersebut dan tidak lebih daripada itu.
2. Pernyataan beramaran tertuduh adalah bersamaan dengan keterangan bersumpahnya di mahkamah tetapi ia tidak bermakna apa yang dikatakan oleh tertuduh di dalam pernyataan beramaran itu adalah benar atau boleh dipercayai. Dalam menentukan sama ada tertuduh telah berjaya menimbulkan keraguan munasabah atas kes pendakwaan, mahkamah harus menilai percakapan beramaran tertuduh dengan keseluruhan keterangan yang dikemukakan di hadapan mahkamah.
KETERANGAN: Pernyataan - Penerimaan masuk - Pernyataan bawah s. 37B Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Pernyataan yang dibuat oleh tertuduh di hadapan warden universiti bahawa barang dalam beg adalah ganja - Sama ada pernyataan yang dibuat di hadapan warden termasuk dalam ruang lingkup kehendak s. 37B(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada semua pernyataan tertuduh kepada warden adalah relevan dan boleh diterima
PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Penafian - Dadah dijumpai di dalam beg - Tertuduh mendakwa beg bukan miliknya tetapi diberikan oleh rakan seuniversitinya - Tertuduh mendakwa rakannya telah datang ke bilik tertuduh dan memberikan beg sebelum rakannya membunuh diri - Tertuduh mendapatkan nasihat peguamnya sebelum membuat percakapan beramaran - Tertuduh membangkitkan perkara mengenai rakannya beberapa hari selepas ditangkap dalam percakapan beramaran tertuduh - Sama ada naratif penceritaan tertuduh telah menimbulkan keraguan munasabah - Sama ada percakapan amaran tertuduh harus dinilai dengan keseluruhan keterangan di hadapan mahkamah
UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Dadah berbahaya - Pengedaran - Dadah jenis cannabis seberat 3875.66g - Saksi-saksi terhidu bau ganja dari bilik penginapan universiti tertuduh - Tertuduh merupakan pelajar universiti dan menghuni bilik seorang diri - Dadah dijumpai di dalam beg dari bilik penginapan tertuduh oleh pihak universiti - Tertuduh merayu dan menghalang saksi daripada membuka beg - Saksi-saksi melaporkan penemuan ganja kepada polis - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai kawalan dan jagaan eksklusif bilik di mana dadah dijumpai - Sama ada tingkah laku tertuduh menunjukkan tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan berkenaan kandungan beg yang berisi dadah
- Bagi pihak perayu - Sivanathan; T/n Sivanathan
- Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Nurul Izzah, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri
|
CLJ 2022 Volume 7 (Part 5)
Although a bionic prosthesis has a much better functionality, the court, in deciding whether the bionic prosthesis is more suitable than the mechanical prosthesis for an accident victim, must weigh the evidence and relevant circumstances so as to ensure that the claim is justified and the claimant is appropriately compensated; and, allowing a claim for bionic prosthesis together with loss of future earnings would unreasonably set a precedent for claims in similar circumstances. The award for a prosthesis must be reconciled with the overall scheme of compensatory awards.
Chua Kay Hock & Anor v. Lee Hoon Poi [2022] 7 CLJ 669 [CA]
DAMAGES
DAMAGES: Personal injuries - Leg - Amputation of right lower limb above knee level - Appeal against quantum - High Court set aside award for bionic prosthesis by Sessions Judge - Whether bionic prosthesis more suitable - Whether award for loss of future earnings ought to be considered in award for cost of prosthesis - Whether hydraulic leg widely used - Whether High Court Judge correctly applied principles and taken into consideration important and relevant considerations - Whether compensation for mechanical prosthesis justified
YAACOB MD SAM JCA
ABU BAKAR JAIS JCA
GUNALAN MUNIANDY JCA
- For the appellants - Teo Han Ley & Lee Yen Yee; M/s Teo & Assocs
- For the respondent - Asley Lim Suat Leng; M/s S N Fam & Co
Under O. 42 r. 13 of the Rules of Court 2012, an order or a judgment may be set aside within 30 days after the receipt of the said order/judgment. Once, the order or a judgment has been perfected, the court becomes functus officio.
Jacy Tintang & Anor v. Mayan Nayang [2022] 7 CLJ 682 [CA]
CIVIL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Intervener - Application for - Application to intervene in proceedings - Recovery of vacant possession of untitled parcel - Native customary rights land - Order of possession granted - Whether application to intervene made 'at any stage of the proceeding' - Whether order perfected - Whether court functus officio - Whether applicant had legal interest on land - Rules of Court 2012, O. 15 rr. 6 & 10
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Setting aside - Application for - Order - Native customary rights land - Application to set aside order of possession - Whether application to set aside order filed within time frame provided under statutes - Whether application filed within 30 days after receipt of order - Rules of Court 2012, O. 42 r. 13
MOHAMAD ZABIDIN MOHD DIAH JCA
LEE HENG CHEONG JCA
AHMAD NASFY YASIN JCA
- For the appellants - Allan Lao Puong Toong, Lidwina Kiew & Charmaine Wong; M/s David Allan Sagah & Teng Advocs
- For the respondent - Clarine Chan & Jenn Kiew; M/s Baru Bian Advocs
In a drug trafficking case, a trial judge's omission or failure in making a finding of which presumption she was relying on ie, did she rely on presumed possession or actual possession or did she rely on actual trafficking or presumed trafficking, is fatal. This would render the sentence and conviction of the accused unsafe.
Mohamad Hafizi Zainal Abidin v. PP [2022] 7 CLJ 697 [CA]
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Whether there was break in chain of evidence - Failure of trial judge to state in notes of proceedings whether possession and trafficking were direct or through presumptions under s. 37(d) of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 in decision to order accused to enter defence - Whether would impact burden placed on defence - Whether fatal - Whether sentence and conviction safe
HANIPAH FARIKULLAH JCA
LEE HENG CHEONG JCA
CHE MOHD RUZIMA GHAZALI JCA
- For the appellant - Zamri Ibrahim; M/s Zamri Ibrahim & Co
- For the respondent - Mohd Zain Ibrahim; DPP
An entire agreement clause in an agreement constitutes a binding agreement between parties, in that, it provides certainty that the parties had agreed that the contract supersedes any previous understandings, documents or other contractual agreements between the parties. Although the word 'contract' or 'agreement' is omitted in the clause, the court must construe the words in its proper context, to give effect to the intention of the parties. Hence, the court, in interpreting a private contract, must look at the factual matrix which formed the background of the transaction and adopt an objective approach.
Bsynclive Sdn Bhd v. Technology Park Malaysia Corporation Sdn Bhd [2022] 7 CLJ 710 [HC]
CONTRACT
CONTRACT: CONTRACT: Agreement - Validity - Whether former agreement superseded by latter agreement - Whether former agreement stamped - Whether parties intended to replace and change obligations under former agreement - Whether obligations of parties substantially changed in latter agreement - Whether both agreements ran concurrently - Whether collateral to one another - Whether entire agreement clause in latter agreement constituted binding agreement - Whether damages proven
CONTRACT: Interpretation - Intention of contracting parties - Agreements - Latter agreement contained entire agreement clause - Objective approach - Whether parties intended to replace and change obligations under former agreement - Whether obligations of parties substantially changed in latter agreement - Whether latter agreement superseded former agreement - Whether entire agreement clause in latter agreement constituted binding agreement
MOHD ARIEF EMRAN ARIFIN JC
- For the plaintiff - Amin Othman; M/s Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak
- For the defendant - Loo Peh Fern, Elly Rawaida (PDK) & Wan Nabil Ikram (PDK); M/s Skrine
A State Government who, in the course of promoting and encouraging investment by a private company by making promise of a leasehold of a parcel of state land which is essential for the private company's construction and operation of a sizeable factory in the State, can be liable for negligence in making such promise in breach of its duty of care if it is discovered the said parcel of state land had previously been gazetted or earmarked for an expressway construction, thereby resulting in the need for there to be a relocation and rebuilding at a different site and causing damages to the private company.
Hartalega Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Ors [2022] 7 CLJ 735 [HC]
LAND LAW | TORT
LAND LAW: Acquisition of land - Land earmarked for expressway construction - Land matters - State Government made promise of leasehold of state land essential for private company's construction and operation of factory - Whether promise made with impunity - Private company forced to relocate and rebuild at different site - Whether private company suffered damages - Whether State Government and relevant land office negligent - Whether there was breach of duty of care - Whether State Government and relevant land office could hide behind limited protection of s. 22 of National Land Code - Whether damages ought to be awarded to private company
TORT: Negligence - Land matters - State Government made promise of leasehold of state land essential for private company's construction and operation of factory - Whether promise made with impunity - Subsequent discovery of state land being previously gazetted or earmarked for expressway construction - Private company forced to relocate and rebuild at different site - Whether private company suffered damages - Whether State Government and relevant land office negligent - Whether there was breach of duty of care - Whether State Government and relevant Land Office could hide behind limited protection of s. 22 of National Land Code - Whether damages ought to be awarded to private company
- For the plaintiffs - David Chong; M/s Mustafa Ling & Co
- For the defendants - Nur Irmawatie Daud; State Legal Advisors, Selangor
The defendant, as a senior and veteran politician, had an interest, moral duty and legal obligation to publish his impugned defamatory statement on his blog against the plaintiff, as the evidence and circumstances that arose gave reasonable grounds to call for an investigation as to whether the plaintiff had indeed covered up the 1MDB scandal during his tenure as the nation's Attorney General. As the scandal sought to destroy and bring the Malaysian administration of justice, policing, prosecution and financial governance into utter disrepute, the defendant was well within his right to voice out his thoughts to the public at large, and the Malaysian public had a corresponding interest to be in the know and informed of the plaintiff's actions or inactions. The defendant's defence of justification alone was thus sufficient to defeat the plaintiff's defamation suit against him.
Mohamed Apandi Ali v. Lim Kit Siang [2022] 7 CLJ 786 [HC]
TORT
TORT: Defamation - Libel - Publication of article containing impugned statement against plaintiff as Attorney General - Impugned statement stating plaintiff 'aided and abetted' in scandal - Whether impugned statement ought to be ascribed the lesser meaning that there were reasonable grounds for investigations to be conducted - Peculiar and questionable circumstances plaguing plaintiff's decision to exonerate suspects in scandal - Whether gave rise to suspicion of cover up or commission of cover up - Whether defendant led concrete evidences to justify defamatory imputations - Whether defendant succeeded in defence of justification - Whether defendant well within his rights to voice out this thoughts to public at large - Whether defendant exercised reasonable journalism - Whether defence of qualified privilege proved - Whether publication of impugned statement actionable against defendant
- For the plaintiff - M Visvanathan, R Karnan & V Sanjay Nathan; M/s Saibullah MV Nathan & Co
- For the defendant - Sangeet Kaur Deo & Simranjit Kaur Chhran Daljit Singh; M/s Karpal Singh & Co
ARTICLES
LNS Article(s)
COMMODITY MURABAHAH PLATFORM IN INDONESIA* [Read excerpt]
by Mohammad Mahbubi Ali [2022] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvi
[2022] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvi
MALAYSIA
COMMODITY MURABAHAH PLATFORM IN INDONESIA*
by
Mohammad Mahbubi Ali
Tawarruq (hereafter referred to as commodity murabahah) has been widely used by Islamic financial institutions (IFIs) to structure various financial products and instruments.
The concept gained wide acceptance from industry players due to its flexibility which allows IFIs to provide cash with a predetermined fixed income just as their conventional counterparts do.
A majority of shariah scholars consider commodity murabahah acceptable from the shariah point of view because it involves a tripartite arrangement that is different from bay 'inah (sale and buy-back arrangement). In contrast, some scholars deem the modern practice of commodity murabahah a fictitious transaction, thus impermissible. For others, the concern over commodity murabahah is not so much about the essence of the contract, but due to several shariah violations entangling its application and can be accepted once they are addressed. In assisting Islamic financial institutions to meet their liquidity needs while addressing shariah concerns over the modern practice of commodity murabahah, the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) has outlined several shariah guidelines and requirements for its application, which in turn led to the introduction of various platforms in many jurisdictions. Among these platforms is the Indonesia based Jakarta Future Exchange (JFX) shariah.
. . .
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES BORNE BY WILLS-DRAFTING LAWYERS THAT ARE NOT APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE WILL* [Read excerpt]
by Wong Kai Yun[i] Jaryl Lim[ii] [2022] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvii
[2022] 1 LNS(A) lxxxvii
SINGAPORE
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES BORNE BY WILLS-DRAFTING LAWYERS THAT ARE NOT APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE WILL*
by
Wong Kai Yun[i]
Jaryl Lim[ii]
The prevalence of DIY Wills online and Wills-drafting services by non-lawyers makes Wills-drafting appear deceptively simple. Yet, the Court of Appeal in Low Ah Cheow cautioned that Wills are among the most important legal documents that one can execute, and that it would be wrong for lawyers to consider their preparation as "no more than a routine exercise in form filling". Gleaning from reported decisions over the last five years, this article highlights five easily overlooked responsibilities that Wills-drafting lawyers bear which extend beyond meeting the legal formalities of a Will.
With online DIY Wills being "a dime a dozen", and non-lawyers offering to draft Wills at meagre costs, the role of the lawyer in Wills-drafting is grossly under-valued and underrated.
Apart from the lawyer's expertise on the legal formalities (for example, a Will must be in writing and signed by the testator in the presence of two independent witnesses), and translating the testator's instructions to stock Wills, many do not realise or appreciate that the lawyer's legal responsibilities extend beyond the words on the face of the Will.
. . .
LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS
Principal Acts
Amending Acts
PU(A)
PU(B)
Legislation Alert
Updated
| Act/Principal No. |
Title |
Amended by |
In force from |
Section amended |
| AKTA 26 |
Akta Bantuan Guaman 1971 |
PU(A) 274/2022 |
5 September 2022 |
Jadual Kedua Dan Ketiga |
| ACT 26 |
Legal Aid Act 1971 |
PU(A) 274/2022 |
5 September 2022 |
Second and Third Schedules |
| AKTA 4 |
Akta Keselamatan Sosial Pekerja 1969 |
AKTA A1658 |
1 September 2022 [PU(B) 395/2022] |
Seksyen 5, Jadual Ketiga & Jadual Keempat |
| ACT 4 |
Employees' Social Security Act 1969 |
ACT A1658 |
1 September 2022 [PU(B) 395/2022] |
Section 5, Third & Fourth Schedules |
| AKTA 800 |
Akta Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan 2017 |
AKTA A1657 |
1 September 2022 [PU(B) 393/2022] |
Seksyen 16, Jadual Kedua & Jadual Ketiga |
Revoked
|
