CASE(S) OF THE WEEK
BSM lwn. BAA & SATU LAGI [2023] 1 CLJ 581
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, TEMERLOH
ROSLAN MAT NOR PK
[SAMAN PEMULA NO: CB-24F-12-08-2022]
07 DECEMBER 2022
(i) Tiada undang-undang khusus di Malaysia tentang bidang kuasa mahkamah untuk mengarahkan seseorang menjalankan ujian DNA demi penentuan nasab. Walaupun apa-apa prinsip undang-undang yang terpakai di United Kingdom boleh diguna pakai di Malaysia, tertakluk pada pematuhan ketat s. 3(1) Akta Undang-undang Sivil 1956, prinsip undang-undang keluarga dalam bidang kuasa lain berkaitan nasab tidak sesuai diguna pakai dalam sistem perundangan di Malaysia untuk memutuskan kes ini.
UNDANG-UNDANG KELUARGA: Kanak-kanak - Penentuan nasab - Permohonan agar kanak-kanak melalui ujian deoxyribonucleic acid ('DNA') - Sama ada mahkamah mempunyai bidang kuasa mengarahkan seseorang menjalankan ujian DNA untuk menentukan nasab - Sama ada prinsip undang-undang keluarga di United Kingdom boleh digunakan di Malaysia - Sama ada prinsip parens patriae wajar digunakan
SYED ISKANDAR SYED JAAFAR v. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA & ORS [2023] 1 CLJ 642
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
WAN AHMAD FARID SALLEH J
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: WA-24-63-11-2020]
05 JULY 2022
The constitutional question sought to be referred to the Federal Court, in this case, pertaining to the application of the doctrine of basic structure, in light of the conflicting Federal Court decisions on the same, would have a direct bearing on the matter of dispute before the High Court; having the implication of bringing the dispute to an end without further deliberation by the High Court, hence depriving the parties of the right of appeal. The application, if allowed, would also render the Federal Court to assume original jurisdiction not anticipated under art. 128(1) of the Federal Constitution.
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Proceedings - Questions and issues of law - Application under s. 84 of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Question in originating summons referred to Federal Court for determination - Question pertaining to doctrine of basic structure in light of two separate schools of thought - Whether answer to question would be premature - Whether answer by Federal Court would dispose of originating summons - Whether would have effect of Federal Court assuming original jurisdiction - Whether would render right of appeal nugatory
JUDICIAL QUOTES
Having scrutinised the provisions of ss. 80(8) & (9) of the LPA and the CF Rules, we do not find any provision therein that gives the respondent the power to issue any guidelines restricting the application of the provisions in ss. 80(8) & (9) of the LPA and make it applicable only to the dishonesty of a certain class of advocates and solicitors, ie, sole proprietors. It is our considered view that the respondent does not have such powers to issue the guidelines and whittle down the ambit of ss. 80(8) & (9) of the LPA and restrict the claims only to acts of dishonesty of advocates and solicitors who are sole proprietors.
In fact, we found that the respondent does not have powers to issue any guidelines in the nature of the guidelines at all. In order to issue such guidelines, there must be express provision in the LPA authorising the respondent to issue them. However, there is no such express power found in the LPA.
At best, the respondent can only make rules pursuant to s. 80(12) of the LPA, and that too for the limited purposes stated therein, which is in respect of procedure for making a claim from the compensation fund. Such rules must be confined to procedural matters and cannot affect substantive rights of parties. - per Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera JCA in Michael Joseph Carvalho & Anor v. Majlis Peguam Malaysia [2022] 9 CLJ 849
LATEST CASES
Legal Network Series
|
[2022] 1 LNS 13
|
RICHARD CHIEW VEE CHING v. LEMBAGA PENCEGAHAN JENAYAH MALAYSIA & ORS
1. The advisory board has the rights and powers to regulate its own procedures in deciding to exclude the presence of the applicant and his counsel at the representation hearing. In the event the advisory board requests the applicant and his counsel to leave the representation hearing after the applicant has presented his evidence and submitted his submissions, this does not imply that the applicant has not been accorded the full extent of his rights to be heard.
2. Application for a writ of habeas corpus must be directed against the current detention order and not against the expired remand order. Hence, an applicant cannot rely on s. 4(1)(a) and 4(2)(a) of the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 and Article 151(1) of the Federal Constitution to challenge the detention order on matters relating to remand orders.
PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Habeas corpus - Detention under s. 19A(1) of Prevention of Crime Act 1959 ('POCA') - Advisory board allowed police officer present during representation proceedings - Advisory board requested applicant and his counsel to leave representation proceedings after conclusion of applicant's evidence and submissions - Whether there was non-compliance with regs. 3 and 5(4) of Prevention of Crime (Advisory Board Procedure) Regulations 2014 - Whether any prejudice caused to applicant during representation hearing - Whether applicant had been accorded full extent of his rights to be heard at hearing - Whether applicant was denied a fair and effective representation
PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Habeas corpus - Detention under s. 19A(1) of Prevention of Crime Act 1959 ('POCA') - Failure to supply applicant's statement requested after completion of representation hearing - Whether supply of statement of applicant was mandatory - Whether request for statement could be denied on ground of public interest
PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Habeas corpus - Dispute on remand orders - Whether application for writ of habeas corpus could be directed against remand order - Whether guidelines pronounced in case of Zaidi bin Kanapiah was mandatory - Whether there was non-compliance with s. 4(1)(a) and 4(2)(a) of Prevention of Crime Act 1959 and art. 151(1) of Federal Constitution
- For the applicant - Evelyn Cheong Phing, Wan Zaleha Abdul Wahab & Naizatul Zamrina Karizaman; M/s KL Chee & Co
- For the respondents - Nuur Izham Ismail, Muhammad Sinti & Anasuha Atiqah Mat Said, Deputy Public Prosecutors; Attorney's General Chambers
|
|
[2022] 1 LNS 15
|
SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD v. KUKUP FERRY TERMINAL SDN BHD & ORS
In the case of a guarantee with terms and conditions that state that the existing guarantors' liabilities and obligations remain in full force and effect by way of continuing security until the bank has signed an absolute discharge, then the guarantors are bound by such terms. The bank is not bound by any agreement or consent order, which the bank is not privy thereto, on the replacement or substitution of guarantors.
BANKING: Securities for advances - Guarantee - Substitution of guarantors - Guarantors replaced pursuant to a consent order in separate action - Bank not party to consent order - Whether terms of consent judgment binding and enforceable against bank - Whether there was absolute discharge of existing guarantors - Whether existing guarantors were contractually bound by guarantee until written discharge by bank - Whether new security documentation must be signed by new guarantors before release of existing guarantors
BANKING: Bank and banking business - Guarantees - Recovery action - Certificate of indebtedness - Whether bank officer’s statement as to amount owing by borrower was final and conclusive proof of indebtedness - Whether guarantors had proven any manifest error in certificate of indebtedness - Whether guarantors were liable to pay amount stated in certificate of indebtedness
- For the plaintiff - Syed Fadzil Hashim AlHabshi & Syanzuhri Marzuki; M/s Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis
- For the 3rd, 4th & 6th defendants - Muhammad Nor Tamrin Azali Ibrahim; M/s Zabir Imran & Partners
|
|
[2022] 1 LNS 25
|
LOH CHUN HOO v. LOH CHUN HOO & ORS
A claim for the tort of conspiracy is obviously unsustainable for lack of particulars or essential elements being pleaded in the statement of claim. Failure to particularise elements of conspiracy in the statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action warranting striking out of the statement of claim. It follows that the court will not exercise its discretion to proceed with any amendment to cure the defect in the statement of claim that had failed to disclose any cause of action.
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Action - Action premised on tort of conspiracy to injure, breach of duty and extortion - No reasonable cause of action - Action against solicitors - Breach of fiduciary duty not particularised in statement of claim - Elements of conspiracy not pleaded in statement of claim - Damages not pleaded - Whether cause of action for extortion sustainable in civil action - Whether plaintiff had disclosed cause of action on abuse of profession - Whether action could be saved by amendment - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19(1)(a)
- For the plaintiff - Aaron Pang; M/s Aaron Pang & Co
- For the 1st defendant - Gary Teh; M/s Gary Teh & Ngiam
|
|
[2021] 1 LNS 1390
|
HERITAGE LOGISTICS SDN BHD lwn. WANAZALY ANSANY
Prosiding penghakiman terus adalah tidak sesuai untuk mempertimbangkan isu sama ada penjual kepada suatu perjanjian jual beli telah mengingkari obligasi di bawah perjanjian jual beli tersebut dengan tidak memenuhi pra-syarat terdahulu berkaitan proses untuk pindahmilik. Saksi-saksi diperlukan bagi menjelaskan tindakan-tindakan yang telah dilakukan oleh penjual tersebut begitu juga dengan pembeli bagi menunjukkan bahawa penjual telah memungkiri obligasi tersebut.
PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman terus - Perjanjian jual beli - Pembeli menuntut pemulangan baki deposit berikutan kegagalan penjual memenuhi pra-syarat terdahulu perjanjian - Penjual lewat melengkapkan proses untuk pindahmilik hartanah disebabkan perintah kawalan pergerakan - Sama ada penjual telah menjalankan obligasi dan tanggungjawab yang diperuntukkan di dalam perjanjian jual beli - Sama ada tindakan-tindakan penjual telah terhalang disebabkan oleh keadaan semasa yang di luar jangkauan pihak-pihak ketika perjanjian jual beli ditandatangani - Sama ada pembeli telah menyumbang kepada kelewatan penjual untuk melengkapkan proses untuk pindahmilik - Sama ada isu-isu yang dibangkitkan adalah remeh dan kosong
- Bagi pihak perayu - JM Chong, Vincent Chee & Co
- Bagi pihak responden - Mishant & Co
|
|
[2021] 1 LNS 1552
|
NORSHAFIQAH SAADI lwn. MAJLIS PERBANDARAN KOTA BHARU
Tindakan yang segera perlu diambil bagi pemfailan memorandum kehadiran. Penjelasan yang munasabah perlu diberikan oleh defendan dalam permohonan untuk perlanjutan masa untuk memfailkan memorandum kehadiran bagi membolehkan mahkamah menggunakan budi bicara bawah A. 3 k. 5 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 dalam membenarkan permohonan perlanjutan masa tersebut. Pelantikan peguam dan perbincangan strategi pembelaan dan keperluan mendapatkan pengesahan dan kelulusan dalaman defendan bukanlah alasan yang munasabah yang menjustifikasikan kegagalan pematuhan keperluan asas untuk pemfailan memorandum kehadiran.
PROSEDUR SIVIL: Masa - Perlanjutan masa - Permohonan untuk perlanjutan masa bagi pemfailan memorandum kehadiran - Memorandum kehadiran difailkan lewat dan selepas tempoh masa yang ditetapkan - Permohonan difailkan selepas tempoh masa untuk memfailkan memorandum kehadiran tamat - Sama ada terdapat penjelasan yang munasabah atas kelewatan pemfailan memorandum kehadiran - Sama ada pelantikan peguam dan perbincangan strategi pembelaan menjustifikasikan kelewatan pemfailan memorandum kehahiran - Sama ada tindakan segera perlu diambil dalam pemfailan memorandum kehadiran - Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 3 k. 5
- Bagi pihak perayu - Norul Azmatun Mohd Arshad; T/n Alami & Partners
- Bagi pihak responden - Aaron Abraham @ Aaron Kerubakaran Isaac; T/n Lachaman Lalchand & Associates
|
CLJ 2023 Volume 1 (Part 3)
The tort of collateral abuse of process is a distinct tort to cater for the conduct of a party which abuses the court's process for ulterior or collateral purposes rather than to seek legal remedy as provided by law. In circumstances where it had been demonstrated, on a balance of probabilities, that a plaintiff had filed a suit, not for the genuine purpose of obtaining the requisite reliefs permissible by law but for a collateral purpose of obtaining some other advantages, then such a situation might find cause of action in the tort of collateral abuse of process.
Conweld Engineering Sdn Bhd & Ors v. Goh Swee Boh & Anor [2023] 1 CLJ 323 [CA]
TORT
TORT: Abuse of process - Position in Malaysia - Whether tort of collateral abuse of process should continue to be recognised as distinct cause of action - Whether Malaysian courts ought to follow decision of Singapore Court of Appeal in Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd v. Management Corporation Of Grange Heights Strata Title Plan No. 301
TORT: Abuse of process - Elements - Whether elements of tort of abuse of process established - Whether process complained of initiated - Whether purpose for initiating process other than to obtain genuine redress which process offers - Whether claimant suffered damage or injury in consequence
YAACOB MD SAM JCA
S NANTHA BALAN JCA
GHAZALI CHA JCA
- For the appellants - Saw Wei Siang, Ling Hua Keong & Audrey Chong Pei Ying; M/s Ranjit Singh & Yeoh
- For the respondents - Rishwant Singh & Chia Eng Yi; M/s Cecil Abraham & Partners
(i) Under the common law principle enunciated in Re Duomatic Limited, anything that the shareholders of a company can do by formal resolution in a general meeting can also be performed by them informally if they unanimously assent to it. (ii) Even if all the directors per se agree, the principle cannot without more, be invoked. It can only be invoked if the directors are also the only shareholders of the company. If they have all approved in their capacities as directors, the fact that they are also the only shareholders would bring the principle into play.
Ever-Yield Sdn Bhd v. Yap Keat Choon & Other Appeals [2023] 1 CLJ 345 [CA]
CIVIL PROCEDURE | COMPANY LAW
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Action - Claim - Claim against companies - Claim for unpaid director's remuneration and repayment of personal loans, advances and cash made available to companies - Whether claim proven
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Action - Counterclaim - Counterclaim by companies against former director - Counterclaim for cash withdrawn from company's accounts, monies received for cash sales and funds caused to be paid to persons without justification - Whether counterclaim proven
COMPANY LAW: Shareholders - Resolutions - Remuneration of directors - Claim for unpaid director's remuneration - Principle in Re Duomatic Limited - Whether there was assent of all shareholders on remuneration - Whether there was resolution passed by directors who constituted all of shareholders - Whether resolution deemed to have been passed by shareholders at general meeting - Whether claim for unpaid director's remuneration proven
LEE SWEE SENG JCA
RAVINTHRAN PARAMAGURU JCA
MOHD NAZLAN GHAZALI JCA
- For the appellants - Marina Tiu, Chieng Ho Ming & Joyce Blasius; M/s Yap Chin & Tiu
- For the respondent - Tsang Hieng Yee & Chin Ye Shan; M/s Tsang & Co
Declarations will not be granted unless all parties who will be affected by such declarations are properly named as a party and are before the court. Only in the rarest of rare cases would a declaration, without naming the persons who would be affected by the declarations sought, be granted.
Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy & Ors v. YB Dato’ Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi – Timbalan Perdana Menteri/Menteri Dalam Negeri & Ors [2023] 1 CLJ 385 [CA]
CIVIL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Declaration - Appeal - Applicants sought declarations that individual a threat to security and public of Federation and not fit to be permanent resident of Malaysia - Individual not named as party to action - Whether omission to name individual impediment to granting of declarations - Whether court could grant against party not before court
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Originating summons - Applicants sought declarations that individual a threat to security and public of Federation and not fit to be permanent resident of Malaysia - Individual not named as party to action - Whether originating summons ought to be struck out - Rules of Court 2012, O. 18 r. 19
ABDUL KARIM ABDUL JALIL JCA
S NANTHA BALAN JCA
AZMAN ABDULLAH J
- For the appellants - Gopal Sri Ram, R Kengadharan, Karthigesan Shanmugam, Kanagavalli Krishnamoorthy, Phyllia Lim & Athanasia Yolanda; M/s Karthig Shan
- For the respondents - Suzana Atan; DPP
- For the intervener - Noor Atiqah Zainal Abidin; M/s Adnan Sharida & Assocs
A disciplinary proceeding has its own set of rules. The court must always exercise caution in interfering with the decision of professional bodies exercising disciplinary functions over members of their profession. In a judicial review application, the court is more concerned with the decision-making process and not the decision itself. The power to interfere in such a case is not as an appellate authority but as a judicial authority to see whether there is a fundamental procedural flaw or contravention of the law in arriving at a decision.
Ahmad Nasri Abdul Wahab v. Disciplinary Appeal Board Of The Malaysian Institute Of Accountants & Ors [2023] 1 CLJ 401 [HC]
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Application for - Application for judicial review against decisions made in disciplinary proceedings - Applicant found guilty of act amounting to 'professional conduct' within meaning under r. 2 of Malaysian Institute of Accountants (Disciplinary) Rules 2002 made under Accountants Act 1967 - Challenge against decisions of Disciplinary Committee and Disciplinary Appeal Board - Whether decisions tainted with illegality, procedural impropriety, irrationality and disproportionality - Whether decisions ought to be quashed
- For the applicant - Ira Biswas & Alexie Ng Ying Ching; M/s Chooi & Company + Cheang & Ariff
- For the respondents - Mohanadass Kanagasabai, Syarihah Razman & Tan Joon Meng; M/s Mohanadass Partnership
No appeal shall lie to the High Court from a decision of a subordinate court in any civil cause or matter where the amount in dispute or the value of the subject-matter is RM10,000 or less except on a question of law.
Kolej Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman v. Dr Muhammad Omar [2023] 1 CLJ 437 [HC]
CIVIL PROCEDURE | WORDS AND PHRASES
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Competency - Appeal from Magistrate's Court to High Court - Amount in dispute or value of subject-matter less than RM10,000 - Whether s. 28(1) of Courts of Judicature Act 1964 satisfied - Whether appeal posed questions of law - Whether appeal competent
WORDS AND PHRASES: Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Section 28(1) - 'the amount in dispute or the value of the subject-matter' - Whether refers to adjudged sum or sum claimed
- For the appellant - Bryan Chen; M/s Shook Lin & Bok
- For the respondent - in person
Di akhir kes pendakwaan, hakim bicara wajib menyatakan dengan pasti sama ada kesemua intipati pertuduhan telah berjaya dibuktikan atau hanya anggapan dibuat terhadap tertuduh sebelum mendapati dan memutuskan bahawa satu kes prima facie terbukti menurut s. 180(4) Kanun Tatacara Jenayah. Kegagalan menyatakan hal tersebut akan memberi satu gambaran pada tertuduh bahawa intipati-intipati tersebut telah dibuktikan secara pasti, dengan itu, mengakibatkan prejudis terhadap tertuduh.
Shahfiq Kharidan & Satu Lagi lwn. PP [2023] 1 CLJ 456 [HC]
PROSEDUR JENAYAH
PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap keputusan Mahkamah Sesyen - Pertuduhan bawahs. 17(a) Akta Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia 2009 dibaca bersama-sama dengan s. 34 Kanun Keseksaan - Sama ada hakim bicara membuat penilaian maksima terhadap keterangan-keterangan pendakwaan - Sama ada wujud kes prima facie - Sama ada intipati-intipati pertuduhan berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada sabitan dan hukuman selamat
- Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Siti Sarah Zainal Abidin; TPR
- Bagi pihak tertuduh - Sukri Mohamad & Marina; T/n Wan Haron Sukri & Nordin
The acts of showing, playing, screening, streaming to the public and/or communicating to the public in business premises or otherwise, copyrighted works of the whole, or a substantial part of it and/or causing the aforementioned, without the consent of the copyright owners, is an act of copyright infringement under s. 36 of the Copyright Act 1987.
The Football Association Premier League Ltd & Anor v. Bar Theory Sdn Bhd & Ors [2023] 1 CLJ 471 [HC]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: Copyright - Infringement - Restaurant bar live-screened earlier Premier League matches without requisite subscription, authorisation, license or permission - Whether communication to public - Whether performance, showing or playing to public - Whether act amounted to copyright infringement - Copyright Act 1987, ss. s. 13(1)(aa), 13(1)(b) & 36
- For the plaintiff - Chew Kherk Ying, Raymond Tan & Shueh Jing Koh; M/s Wong & Partners
- For the defendant - Harvinder Singh Sidhu; M/s Vin Law Co
ARTICLES
LNS Article(s)
MARITAL RAPE IN MALAYSIA FROM THE PERSPECTIVES OF NATURAL LAW, LEGAL REALISM, LEGAL POSITIVISM & ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE [Read excerpt]
by Yong Kin Ngai[i] Edelle Lim Xi Tong[ii] Nabeel Mahdi Althabhawi[iii] [2023] 1 LNS(A) iii
[2023] 1 LNS(A) iii
MALAYSIA
MARITAL RAPE IN MALAYSIA FROM THE PERSPECTIVES OF NATURAL LAW, LEGAL REALISM, LEGAL POSITIVISM & ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE
by
Yong Kin Ngai[i] Edelle Lim Xi Tong[ii] Nabeel Mahdi Althabhawi[iii]
ABSTRACT
"When you are raped by a stranger you have to live with a frightening memory.
When you are raped by your husband, you have to live with your rapist."
– Dr David Finkelhor
It goes without saying that every civilised society recognises rape as one of the most serious sexual crimes. However, under Malaysia's traditional society presumption, marriage serves to furnish a legal right for a husband to engage in sexual relations with his wife. Thus, a husband cannot be charged and convicted for committing rape towards his wife since "marital rape" does not exist in the eyes of the law. The main objective of this article is to analyse whether Malaysia should criminalise marital rape by referring to the opinions of legal jurists and scholars from various schools of jurisprudence, including natural law, legal realism, legal positivism and Islamic jurisprudence. The authors adopt doctrinal research techniques for the successful finishing of this article. The main finding of this article is that marital rape is permitted under the Malaysian Penal Code, but the authors strongly opine that the natural law approach should be adopted and amendments must be made to criminalise marital rape effectively.
. . .
VIRTUALLY ALTERNATIVE: THREE TIPS FOR MEDIATING COMMERCIAL DISPUTES IN A POST-COVID WORLD+ [Read excerpt]
by Debra Parker and Kendall Mutton* [2023] 1 LNS(A) iv
[2023] 1 LNS(A) iv
AUSTRALIA
VIRTUALLY ALTERNATIVE: THREE TIPS FOR MEDIATING COMMERCIAL DISPUTES IN A POST-COVID WORLD+
by
Debra Parker and Kendall Mutton*
Virtual mediations are a powerful tool to bridge geographic borders. In the latest in our series on modern ADR, Debra Parker and Kendall Mutton of the Law Society's Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee provide tips for taking commercial mediation online.
Covid-19 has transformed the way that businesses, the judiciary, and legal practitioners approach commercial disputes.
Parties are increasingly considering virtual and hybrid mediations as a powerful tool to bridge geographic borders. Such platforms are particularly suited to commercial disputes, where delay and cost overruns can force a party into insolvency and in turn affect the remedies available to a plaintiff.
This changing landscape requires practitioners to re-evaluate the options available to litigants, and advise on the appropriate format for mediation relevant to the specific case.
. . .
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 791 |
Akta Cukai Pelancongan 2017 |
AKTA A1673 |
1 Januari 2023 [PU(B) 644/2022] |
Seksyen 66, 69A, 69B dan 70 |
| ACT 791 |
Tourism Tax Act 2017 |
ACT A1673 |
1 January 2023 [PU(B) 644/2022] |
Sections 66, 69A, 69B and 70 |
| AKTA 807 |
Akta Cukai Perkhidmatan 2018 |
AKTA A1672 |
1 Januari 2023 [PU(B) 643/2022] |
Seksyen 26A, 38A, 56A, 56D, 56E, 90A dan 90B |
| ACT 807 |
Service Tax Act 2018 |
ACT A1672 |
1 January 2023 [PU(B) 643/2022] |
Sections 26A, 38A, 56A, 56D, 56E, 90A and 90B |
| AKTA 806 |
Akta Cukai Jualan 2018 |
AKTA A1671 |
1 Januari 2023 [PU(B) 641/2022] |
Seksyen 11A - 11D, 19, 57A, 91, 106, 106A, 106B dan Jadual |
Revoked
| Act/Principal No. |
Title |
Revoked by |
In force from |
| PU(A) 373/2022 |
Perintah Kawalan Harga Dan Antipencatutan (Penentuan Harga Maksimum) (No. 15) 2022 |
PU(A) 5/2023 |
8 Januari 2023 hingga 7 Februari 2023 |
| PU(A) 373/2022 |
Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Determination of Maximum Price) (No. 15) Order 2022 |
PU(A) 5/2023 |
8 January 2023 to 7 February 2023 |
| PU(A) 286/2022 |
Perintah Pengangkutan Jalan (Larangan Penggunaan Jalan) (Jalan Persekutuan) (No. 15) 2022 |
PU(A) 378/2022 |
15 Disember 2022 |
| PU(A) 286/2022 |
Road Transport (Prohibition of Use of Road) (Federal Roads) (No. 15) Order 2022 |
PU(A) 378/2022 |
15 December 2022 |
| PU(A) 224/2022 |
Perintah Kawalan Harga Dan Antipencatutan (Penandaan Harga Barangan Harga Terkawal) (No. 7) 2022 |
PU(A) 327/2022 |
12 Oktober 2022 |
|
