Malaysia: Legal Updates - June 2015


Administrative Law

Kempas Edible Oil Sdn Bhd v Prabdhial Singh a/l Dardara Singh [2015] 3 AMR 529; [2015] 1 LNS* 241 (CA)

High Court judge erred in allowing application for judicial review to issue writ of certiorari to quash award in favour of employer

  • In examining procedural aspect of decision-making process adopted by employer in arriving at decision to terminate employee, High Court judge had departed from established principles of law as laid down in Wong Yuen Hock v Syarikat Hong Leong Assurance Sdn Bhd and another appeal and Dreamland Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd v Choong Chin Sooi
  • Approach taken by Industrial Court consistent with exercise of its function as prescribed by Industrial Relations Act 1967 in having to determine for itself whether employer had established valid reason for employee's dismissal
  • High Court judge in criticising Industrial Court's approach had overlooked fact that if latter had considered itself bound by findings of Sessions Court or guided by those findings, then it would have failed to discharge its function

The judgment may also be viewed here.


RHB Bank Bhd (substituting Kwong Yik Bank Bhd) v Kwan Chew Holdings Sdn Bhd [2015] 1 AMCR~ 871; [2015] 1 LNS 103 (CA)

Whether claim statute barred under s 6(1) Limitation Act 1953

  • High Court had allowed itself to be led by submissions on accrual of cause of action from issue of notice(s) of demand
  • Error led court to a decision it would not have made had it not been for such error — fit and proper case demanding appellate intervention

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here


Azman Jufri v Medtronic Australasia Pty Ltd and another appeal [2015] 5 CLJ 1026; [2015] 4 AMR 45 (CA)

Whether judgment creditor estopped from amending date of act of bankruptcy

  • Misstatement as to date of act of bankruptcy in creditor's petition did not prejudice judgment debtor. Further, no evidence to show that as at date of act of bankruptcy (30 May 2013), judgment debtor had made any attempt to satisfy judgment debt or that judgment debtor had any counterclaim, set off or cross demand. No substantial injustice caused by error in date of act of bankruptcy. Section 131 Bankruptcy Act 1967 ("BA 1967") could be invoked to regularise creditor's petition.
  • Address relied on by judgment creditor was obtained from National Registration Department of Malaysia. Further, judgment debtor's stand that service of bankruptcy notice and creditor's petition effected at wrong address was contradicted as he had admitted to receiving a letter issued by judgment creditor to the very same address that he contended was the wrong one.
  • No express stipulation to say that requirement to annex petition to verifying affidavit is mandatory. Form 11 prescribed by r 106 Bankruptcy Rules 1969 ("BR 1969") merely adverts to "the petition hereunto annexed". Accordingly, failure to annex petition to verifying affidavit only a formal defect or irregularity, curable within the meaning of s 131 BA 1967 and r 274 BR 1969.
  • Clear stipulation in r 18(1) BR 1969 making it mandatory for application to be filed by summons in chambers. Filing of a notice of application by judgment creditor as opposed to a summons in chambers was a clear breach of mandatory provision. Wrong mode adopted by judgment creditor undermined stratum of application for substituted service itself; consequently, any order obtained must be equally tainted and rendered null and void.

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here

Malayan Banking Bhd v KM Music Lines Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) Civil Appeal No A-02-274-01-2012 (CA)

Cheque not paid into account

  • High Court had held that there was suppression of evidence, but not explained how it arrived at this conclusion. Also no explanation as to why testimony of one witness could not be relied upon, or to doubt another. Appellate court did not see relevance of who had typed the words "please pay to OKA Concrete" or spelling error.
  • Matter had not been dealt with on its merits, decision was flawed

The grounds of judgment may be viewed here

Civil Procedure

Oh Kang Kuang & Anor v Roebuck Development Sdn Bhd; Allied Alpine (M) Sdn Bhd (Petitioner) [2015] 2 CLJ 1094 (CA)

Leave application not the occasion whether proposed civil suit will succeed, but whether there are relevant triable issues

  • Affidavits before High Court amply demonstrated there were disputed facts being relied upon in proposed civil suit. High Court erred in proceeding to make findings on disputed facts, resulting in application being dismissed. Had the court correctly appreciated that the disputed facts were in relation to appellants' basis in proposed civil suit, and not the application itself, it could not have come to the decision to dismiss leave application.
  • High Court also erred in holding that because all information of borrowers kept by bank or financial institutions was confidential and protected, any release of such information would be in contravention of Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 and thus prohibited. Court failed to consider that since account was that of respondent company, liquidator not subjected to the restriction.

The High Court grounds of decision may be viewed here or see [2014] AMEJ 0299

Kenneth Chung Kuo Ting & Anor v John Tsang Shing Chi & Anor [2015] 1 CLJ 346; [2015] 1 AMCR 193 (CA)

Whether judgment could be entered until stay order set aside

  • JC erred in entering judgment based on unclear and equivocal admission allegedly made by directors of sub-contractor company when there was a pending and effective stay order granted earlier to refer matter to arbitration

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here

Yap Seng Hock v Southern Finance Bhd (formerly known as United Merchant Finance Bhd) [2015] 2 MLJ 675; [2015] 1 LNS 396 (CA)

'No valid document in court' until writ of summons renewed

  • Senior assistant registrar should have taken stock of status of writ of Summons
  • Just because Court of Appeal remitted suit back for case management, there could not be any assumption that writ of summons that had expired need not be renewed: Duli Yang Amat Mulia Tunku Ibrahim Ismail Ibni Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj Tunku Mahkota Johor v Datuk Captain Hamzah bin Mohd Noor and another appeal (FC)
  • Not only was writ of summons a nullity, no dispute that there had not been any valid service of purported writ of summons. Valid service on appellant was a condition precedent for any subsequent action pursuant on writ of summons.
  • Appellate court appeared to take a different stand from another panel of this court. Not quite clear as to why Court of Appeal did not accede to appellant's motion to order that a valid writ of summons be served on appellant.
  • The fact leave not granted by Federal Court to review dismissal of motion did not mean decision of Court of Appeal had been affirmed: Datuk Syed Kechik bin Syed Mohamed & Anor v The Board of Trustees of The Sabah Foundation & Ors and another application (FC)

The High Court grounds of judgment may be viewed here or see [2013] 1 LNS 523

Malaysia Anak Bang & Ors v Empresa (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor and another appeal [2015] 3 MLRA° 717; [2015] 1 LNS 1735 (CA)

Whether claims and reliefs sought barred by s 2 Public Authorities Protection Act 1948

  • In the light of New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General (or Lands Case) and Mabo v Queensland (No 2), interpretation of effect of assumption of sovereignty expressed in Wi Purata v The Bishop of Wellington in the second half of 1870s no longer had a place in the common law
  • No basis to distinguish Director of Forests, Sarawak & Anor v Balare Jabu & Ors and another appeal

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here


Jiddi Joned Enterprise Sdn Bhd v Louis K H Wong & Co [2015] 1 MLJ 209; [2014] 2 CLJ 644; [2014] AMEJ# 0986 (CA)

Alternative claim for misrepresentation is a separate cause of action

  • HC erred in overlooking fact that alternative claim for misrepresentation was separate cause of action that sought not the specific damages in claim for retention sum, but for general damages to be assessed for misrepresentation
  • Evidence did not support submission that there was a joint effort to cause financier to release loan. Clearly, appellants were particularly concerned that retention sum was deposited as they faced payment of real property gains tax.

The judgment may also be viewed here


Mehdi Dadashi Havadaragh v Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Kastam DiRaja Malaysia & Ors [2015] 4 CLJ 607; [2015] AMEJ 320 (CA)

Written notice for return or release of cash monies within one calendar month

  • When any goods are seized, but there is no prosecution arising from such seizure and there is no claim made in respect of those goods within one calendar month, then and only then are the goods "deemed to be forfeited"
  • Appellant did effectively assert he was the owner of seized USD350,000
  • Statement recorded by customs officer who seized the monies satisfied requirement of 'written notice to a senior officer of customs that he claims the same' as set out in sub-section 128(2) Customs Act 1967

The grounds of the majority decision may also be viewed here


Fadzil Harun v Mohd Azrul Md Ariffin & Anor [2015] 3 AMR 427 (CA)

Claim for contribution from joint tortfeasor

  • Motorist entitled to pursue rights of contribution or indemnity from motorcyclist of up to 70% of damages awarded against pillion rider. As quantum of damages was not disputed, judge erred in law in dismissing motorist's counterclaim.

The judgment may also be viewed here

Labour Law

Tan Poh Thiam v Industrial Court of Malaysia & Anor Civil Appeal No J-01- 414-12-2013 (CA)

Acts or omissions treated as misconduct

  • Allegations, even if true, did not amount to misconduct and warrant dismissal on just cause or excuse
  • Some allegations, even if true, were stale and/or sterile allegations that could be said to have been engulfed by doctrine of condonation
  • Industrial Court had failed to first decide whether complaint and/or charges amounted to misconduct; also failed to do a balancing exercise of the conduct of parties and their respective responsibilities

The grounds of judgment may be viewed here

Land Law

Udiya Chandran a/l Subramaniam v Loo Tak Lam [2015] AMEJ 316; [2015] 1 LNS 104 (CA)

Annulment of transfer of property

  • If a witness is available and appellant could have called but did not, then fair and just to draw an adverse inference. But if he did not know, or could not find the witness, these explained why he did not call and that it was unfair and unjust in the circumstances to draw an adverse inference.
  • Reasoning in High Court grounds of judgment missed forest for the trees
  • Transaction by no means a sale and purchase and a rental back; terms consistent with loan for specific term. This supported appellant's version that it was a loan agreement for 36 months. Registration of a transfer through forms signed in blank, while appellant was led to believe the documents were for a loan, was clearly a fraud.

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here

Chua Eng Wei & Anor v Liow Eng Keong & Anor [2015] 4 CLJ 1027; [2015] AMEJ 696 (CA)

Whether Forms 14A void pursuant to s 26 Contracts Act 1950

  • Patently clear that transfer was not for monetary consideration but on account of natural love and affection
  • Exception under para (a) of s 26 Contracts Act 1950 did not apply; defendants could not avail themselves of benefit of s 26(a) because they were not near relations
  • Resultant transfer of ownership under Forms 14A liable to be set aside pursuant to sub-sections (2)(b) and (3) of s 340 National Land Code 1965

The grounds of judgment may also be viewed here


K Siladass (sued as partner of a firm practising under the name K Siladass & Partners) v CIMB Bank Bhd Civil Appeal No W-02(IM) (NCVC)- 1362-08-2014 (CA)

Whether partner of legal firm entitled to pursue second third party proceedings after having agreed to enter consent judgment without admission of liability

  • Only "anomaly" was partner's insistence that the payment was without an admission of liability; effectively accepted responsibility in law for loss suffered by bank, and made good that loss to the extent of RM125k. To that extent, therefore, it was clear that he was effectively "liable" or "responsible in law" to plaintiff in that sum of money.
  • Having accepted such responsibility, he was entitled to seek contribution from CIMB, which was another or joint tortfeasor

The grounds of judgment may be viewed here

The HC grounds of judgment may be viewed here or see [2014] 1 LNS 977

Siew Yaw Jen v Majlis Perbandaran Kajang and another appeal [2015] 5 CLJ 189; [2015] AMEJ 456 (CA)

Whether action barred by limitation; registered proprietor's refusal to construct retaining walls constituted negligence and council estopped from claiming reliefs claimed in action

  • Cause of action for alleged neglect in relation to construction of retaining walls arose in 2001, not when letter of demand was finally issued in October 2010. Claim barred by limitation by date of its filing on 25 October 2011.
  • Appellate court could not see how registered proprietor's refusal to construct retaining walls after council demanded that it do so could form basis of negligence
  • Ample evidence to show council knew of constraints faced by registered proprietor in relation to construction of retaining walls and accepted that an earth slope was an adequate alternative, and hence proceeded to grant Certificate of Fitness for Occupation

The judgment may also be viewed here


~ All Malaysia Commercial Reports — Monthly publication of High Court and appellate court decisions on commercial Law

# All Malaysia Electronic Judgments — Cases which have not been reported in All Malaysia Reports

* Legal Network Series — Cases available on the Current Law Journal website but which have not been published in CLJ

^ Malayan Law Journal Unreported — Cases available on the LexisNexis website but which have not been published in MLJ

° Malaysian Law Review (Appellate Courts) — Cases from the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions