Print this page 

Issue #27/2023 29 June 2023

To get the most out of this law bulletin and have full access to judgments and other materials, subscribe to
CLJLaw today.
Feel free to forward this bulletin to your colleagues. Sign-up to receive this bulletin directly via email.

New This Week

Case(s) of the Week

a) ACE HOLDINGS BHD v. NORAHAYU RAHMAD & ANOR [2023] 3 CLJ 159

Appeal Updates

a) Appeal Updates

Latest Cases

a) Legal Network Series

b) CLJ 2023 Volume 6 (Part 1)

Articles

a) CLJ Article(s)

b) LNS Article(s)

Legislation Highlights

a) Principal Acts

b) Amending Acts

c) PU(A)

d) PU(B)

e) Legislation Alert
 CASE(S) OF THE WEEK

ACE HOLDINGS BHD v. NORAHAYU RAHMAD & ANOR [2023] 3 CLJ 159

COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
S NANTHA BALAN JCA; MARIANA YAHYA JCA; WONG KIAN KHEONG JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-01(A)-83-02-2022]
06 JUNE 2023

The Industrial Court may hear an unfair dismissal claim by claimants/employees even if they only seek
monetary compensation. The Industrial Court does not lose its jurisdiction to hear a matter merely
because a claimant's statement of case does not seek reinstatement. Even though allowing pure
monetary claims would cause an influx of cases before the Industrial Court, this would result in a
corresponding reduction of such claims in the civil courts.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Appeal against - Appeal against decision of High Court
quashing decision of Industrial Court - Minister of Human Resources ('Minister') referred claimant's
representation to Industrial Court - Claimant only sought monetary compensation and had not applied
for reinstatement remedy - Industrial Court dismissed claim without hearing on sole ground that
Industrial Court ceased to have jurisdiction to decide claim - Whether Industrial Court correct in decision
to dismiss claim

INDUSTRIAL COURT: Jurisdiction - Monetary compensation - Claim for unfair dismissal by

employee/claimant - Claimant only seeking monetary compensation - Claimant's statement of case had
not applied for reinstatement remedy - Industrial Court declined jurisdiction to hear claim - Whether
Industrial Court loses jurisdiction to hear matter merely because claimant's statement of case did not
seek reinstatement - Whether would open floodgates if Industrial Court allowed to hear matter -
Industrial Relations Act 1967

APPEAL UPDATES

1. Malaysia Airlines System Berhad v. Adrian Labo & Ors [2022] 1 LNS 298 affirming the High Court
case of Adrian Labo & Ors v. Malaysia Airlines System Berhad [Judicial Review Application No.:
MYY-13NCVC-2/6-2017]

2. Mimos Berhad v. BCM Electronics Corporation Sdn Bhd [2022] 1 LNS 466 overruling the High Court
case of BCM Electronics Corporation Sdn Bhd v. Mimos Berhad [2019] 1 LNS 973

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2022] 1 LNS 136 ANDELI MALAYSIA SDN BHD v. MPM PROJECT MANAGEMENT SDN BHD & ORS

In a striking-out application, the court will only consider pleadings disclosing a cause of action,
i.e. whether the statement of claim contains sufficient facts to support the ingredient of the
pleaded cause of action. The question of evidence is a matter for determination at the trial. Thus,
an application to strike out an action founded on tort of conspiracy to injure due to lack of
evidence on the said conspiracy is wholly misconceived.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Action - Action premised on tort of conspiracy to injure -
Defendant alleged lack of evidence of conspiracy - Whether statement of claim contains sufficient
facts to support ingredient of pleaded cause of action - Whether question of evidence is a matter for
determination at trial - Whether defendant's application premised on misconception - Whether
serious factual issues could be resolved summarily

For the plaintiff - Mohamed Izzul Faris, Wong Tze Yeong & Tan Xue Qi; M/s Syed Ibrahim & Co
For the 2nd, 5th 6th & 7th defendants - Alfred Lai Choong Wui & Nur Azrina Zainal Azman; M/s
Alfred Lai & Partners

[2022] 1 LNS 344 FORMOSA SHYEN HORNG METAL SDN BHD v. TAN HOCK CHUAN

Where a guarantee expressly stipulates that a guarantor shall be regarded as the principal debtor
and a seller may sue the guarantor without having recourse against the buyer first, then the
seller is entitled to sue the guarantor for the guaranteed amount without including the buyer as a
co-defendant and also without having first to establish liability against the said buyer.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Summary judgment - Guarantee - Guarantor guaranteed payment for value of
goods and products supplied by seller to a buyer - Delivery orders, invoices and statement of
account were issued by seller and received by buyer - Buyer subsequently wound up - Guarantor
wrote to seller to propose settlement of buyer's debt - Whether guarantor stood as principal debtor -
Whether seller could sue guarantor without having recourse against buyer first - Whether guarantor
had been discharged from obligations when guarantor ended his relationship with buyer - Whether a
third party consideration is a good consideration - Whether there were valid or triable defence

For the plaintiff - Cha Kian An; M/s Sebastian Cha & Co
For the defendant - Desmond Choi Wai Onn & Chin Yan Wei; M/s CY Wong Ng & Partners

[2022] 1 LNS 444 PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN BUKIT FRASER v. HIGHLANDS RESTHOUSE HOLDINGS SDN BHD

Application for a stay of proceeding pending reference to arbitration will only be granted if it is
filed soonest possible before any steps are taken by parties in the proceeding. Any steps taken in
response to the action filed by any parties will indicate that they are no longer interested in
arbitrating their dispute. Therefore parties must refrain from taking any step tantamount to
waiving their right to arbitration.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Stay of proceedings - Application for - Stay of proceedings pending reference
to arbitration - Delay - Application by defendant after filing of statement of defence - Whether
defendant had responded to plaintiff's action - Whether defendant had waived right for arbitration -
Whether defendant had taken steps in proceeding - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 10(1)

For the plaintiff - Muhammad Irfan Abdullah; M/s Irfan Aiman

For the defendant - K H Chong; M/s KH Chong & Associates
[2021] 1 LNS 1598 AZIRA MOHD AB GHANI lwn. MUHAMMAD ZUHDI MOHAMAD NOR & SATU LAGI

Hubungan antara peminjam dan pembiaya kewangan perumahan hanyalah hubungan kontraktual
tanpa meletakkan sebarang kewajipan berhati-hati terhadap pembiaya kewangan untuk
memastikan pematuhan ke atas perjanjian jual beli antara peminjam dan penjual sebelum wang
pembiayaan dilepaskan kepada penjual.

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Pembatalan - Tindakan - Kausa tindakan - Tindakan oleh peminjam terhadap
pembiaya kewangan berasaskan kecuaian melepaskan wang pembiayaan pembinaan rumah -
Tindakan terhadap jurunilai dan Jabatan Penilaian - Pembinaan rumah terbengkalai - Sama ada
pembiaya kewangan mempunyai sebarang kewajipan untuk menyemak status pemaju dan status
pembinaan - Sama ada plaintif mempunyai kausa tindakan munasabah terhadap pembiaya
kewangan - Sama ada tuntutan plaintif adalah suatu percubaan untuk mendesak mahkamah untuk
menulis semula kontrak - Sama ada plaintif mempunyai ikatan kontrak dengan jurunilai dan Jabatan
Penilaian bagi membolehkannya membawa tindakan - Sama ada plaintif sewajarnya
bertanggungjawab untuk memastikan pembinaan rumah dilaksanakan sebagaimana perjanjian jual
beli - Sama ada tindakan telah dihalang had masa

Bagi pihak plaintif - Mohd Khuzaimi Mohd Salleh; T/n Wan Jawahir & Takiyudin
Bagi pihak defendan 2 - Hizri Hasshan & Yong Ke-Qin; T/n Akram Hizri Azad & Azmir
Bagi pihak defendan 3 & 4 - Ahmad Faiz Fitri Mohamad; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang

[2021] 1 LNS 1600 LEONG YEE HOOI lwn. MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA & YANG LAIN

Pengataan fakta yang menjadi asas suatu perintah tahanan yang dikeluarkan bawah s. 6(1) Akta
Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 ('Akta') perlu mematuhi kehendak
dalam maksud Akta tersebut iaitu dengan memenuhi intipati berkenaan perbuatan aktiviti yang
dilakukan atau tindakan-tindakan itu telah diancam oleh sekumpulan orang besar berhubung
atau melibatkan pengedaran dadah. Pengataan fakta yang menyatakan pembelian bekalan dadah
oleh orang yang ditahan daripada pengedar dadah tempatan semata-mata tidak sama sekali
menunjukkan penglibatan orang yang ditahan tersebut sebagai salah satu anggota kepada
sekumpulan besar orang.

PENAHANAN PENCEGAHAN: Perintah tahanan - Habeas corpus - Ketidakpatuhan prosedur -

Percanggahan identiti nombor kad pengenalan pemohon dalam laporan penyiasatan - Kelewatan
mengemukakan laporan lengkap penyiasatan kepada Menteri dan pegawai inkuiri - Sama ada
kesilapan perkeranian pada identiti nombor kad pengenalan pemohon telah menyebabkan
perlanggaran kehendak mandatori s. 3(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan
Khas) 1985 - Sama ada kelewatan penyerahan laporan lengkap penyiasatan telah dijelaskan - Sama
ada ketiadaan jurubahasa semasa inkuiri adalah atas permintaan pemohon sendiri

PENAHANAN PENCEGAHAN: Perintah tahanan - Habeas corpus - Tahanan bawah s. 6(1) Akta
Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 ('Akta') - Ketidakpatuhan prosedur -
Pengataan fakta tidak menyatakan responden terlibat dalam sindiket dadah yang melibatkan
sekumpulan besar orang - Sama ada perbuatan pembelian dadah daripada pengedar dadah
menunjukkan penglibatan pemohon sebagai anggota kepada sekumpulan besar orang - Sama ada
pengataan fakta terjatuh kepada ambit skop bawah Akta - Sama ada merupakan ketidakpatuhan
prosedur - Sama ada perintah tahanan boleh dipertahankan

Bagi pihak pemohon - Naizatul Zamrina; T/n KL Chee & Co

Bagi pihak responden - Adilah Roslan, Peguam Kanan Persekutuan; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-
Undang

CLJ 2023 Volume 6 (Part 1)

Article 149 of the Federal Constitution allows a legislation to be promulgated, even if such legislation is
inconsistent with the provisions on fundamental liberties under arts. 5 or 9, 10 and 13, provided that the
said legislation cites either one of the six matters enumerated in art. 149(1)(a) until (f) in its recital.
Further, a discriminatory law is valid if it is based on a reasonable or permissible classification, which is
based on an intelligible differentia that has nexus to the objective of the law itself.
Samat Yamin v. PP [2023] 6 CLJ 1 [FC]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW | CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

(i) The High Court, as parens patriae, has the general inherent powers over a child to make any order
that would be in the best interest of the child, and this would include the power to order that a child
undertake a DNA test for the purposes of determining his or her paternity; (ii) The presumption of
legitimacy in s. 112 of the Evidence Act 1950 does not bar inquiries into the paternity of a child. The
right of a child to know his or her biological parents is now internationally recognised as a basic right of
critical importance to a child. The child has a right to know the truth of his or her origin.
MPPL & Anor v. CAS [2023] 6 CLJ 22 [CA]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

FAMILY LAW

In a case where the claimants' native customary rights ('NCR') (if any) over a lot has been extinguished
pursuant to a direction made, unless quashed or declared invalid, the direction remains valid and in
force. Upon such extinguishment, the land reverts to the Government. Consequently, the claimants who
are claiming NCR over the land is only entitled for compensation and thus has no locus standi to
challenge the decision of the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys to alienate the land to another party
for public purposes, as the claimants are not adversely affected by such decision, and neither can they
be said to have any genuine and real interest in the subject matter.
Superintendant Of Lands And Surveys, Miri Division & Anor v. Abdul Samad Mohd Embong & Ors [2023]
6 CLJ 34 [CA]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | NATIVE LAW AND CUSTOM

In a statement or text made by an individual, the omission to paint the full picture is the very nature and
essence of the concept of 'half-truth' which establishes liability for defamation in circumstances where
the failure to present the requisite information portrays a false impression in the minds of the ordinary
person. The publication of a 'half-truth' can constitute a false statement.
Tan Sri David Chiu Tat-Cheong v. Seema Elizabeth Soy [2023] 6 CLJ 51 [CA]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

TORT

(i) The court has the discretion to award costs personally against the liquidator as a sanction for
instituting unnecessary proceedings or incurring unnecessary litigation expenses; (ii) Conspiracy must be
strictly pleaded and each element of the tort must be particularised. If the type of conspiracy is not
clearly pleaded, the pleading is bad.
Golden Affinity Development Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) v. Lim Yok Wah & Ors And Another Case [2023] 6
CLJ 76 [HC]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

COMPANY LAW | TORT

Tests in relation to DNA testing in paternity cases is child-centric and responsive to the needs of children.
The child's interest must be the touchstone. A DNA test ought to be ordered when it is in the best
interests of the child to do so, especially when there is adequate corroborative evidence to show that
there is a good possibility the plaintiff is the birth father.
JKL v. ABC & Anor [2023] 6 CLJ 109 [HC]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

 FAMILY LAW

As per the case of Badiaddin Mohd Mahidin & Anor v. Arab Malaysian Finance Bhd, in 'exceptional
circumstances', an applicant without an appeal, may file a fresh action to set aside a final order regularly
obtained and drawn up, without being barred by the doctrines of functus officio and res judicata.
However, in proving such, the applicant must show that there is a contravention of a statute which defies
a substantive statutory prohibition so as to render the final order null and void on grounds of illegality or
lack of jurisdiction and not a contravention of a mere procedural requirement of a statute.
Shu Fong Yean v. CIMB Bank Bhd & Anor [2023] 6 CLJ 126 [HC]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

CIVIL PROCEDURE

The court has no power to interfere with the internal management of Parliament or any State Legislative
Assembly. This immunity arises from the doctrine of separation of powers between the three principal
organs of the Government, namely the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary and the court must
always give recognition to this doctrine. If the three branches are left unchecked, a clash would ensue
and destroy the doctrine of separation of powers which would affect the freedom of the three to act
according to their respective jurisdiction.
Zu lkifli Ibrahim v. Dewan Undangan Negeri Pulau Pinang & Anor [2023] 6 CLJ 144 [HC]

SUBJECT CORAM COUNSEL

CIVIL PROCEDURE | CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

ARTICLES

CLJ Article(s)

1. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAW DIVIDE IN JUDICIAL

REVIEW [Read excerpt]
by GREGORY DAS* [2023] 6 CLJ(A) i

LNS Article(s)

1. UNRAVELING THE COMPLEXITIES OF VIGILANTE ACTIONS: EXAMINING THE CONFLICT

BETWEEN COW PROTECTION AND VIOLENCE IN INDIA [Read excerpt]
by Aarya Dubey[i] Kush Shanker[ii] [2023] 1 LNS(A) li

2. UNCONSCIOUS BIAS AND THE GENDER PAY GAP: AUSTIN HEALTH V. TSIKOS+ [Read excerpt]
by John Wilson and Kieran Pender* [2023] 1 LNS(A) lii

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealed Superseded

 ACT 847 Revision of Not Yet Inforce - -
Sentence of
Death and
Imprisonment
For Natural
Life
(Temporary
Jurisdiction of
The Federal
Court) Act
2023

ACT 846 Abolition of Not Yet Inforce - -

Mandatory
Death Penalty
Act 2023

ACT 845 Finance Act The Income Tax Act - -

2023 1967 [Act 53] see s 3;
the Real Property Gains
Tax Act 1976 [Act 169]
see s 18; the Stamp Act
1949 [Act 378] see s
20; the Petroleum
(Income Tax) Act 1967
[Act 543] see s 22 and
the Finance Act 2018
[Act 812] see s 28

ACT 844 The Pure Life 12 May 2023 Date - The Pure Life Society
Society appointed for coming (Shuddha Samajam)
(Shuddha into operation of this Incorporation Ordinance,
Samajam) revised edition pursuant 1957
Incorporation to paragraph 6(1)(xxiii) [Ord. No. 15 of 1957]
Act 1957 of the Revision of Laws
(Revised Act 1968 [Act 1];
2023) Revised up to 24 April
2023; First enacted in
1957 as Ordinance No
15 of 1957

ACT 843 Preservation 1 March 2023 Date Emergency Powers Preservation of Public
of Public appointed for coming Ordinance Security Ordinance, 1962
Security into operation of this [Sabah Cap. 41] [Sabah Ordinance No. 6
(Sabah) Act revised edition pursuant of 1962]
1962 to paragraph 6(1)(xxiii)
(Revised of the Revision of Laws
2023) Act 1968 [Act 1];
Revised up to 15
February 2023; First
enacted in 1962 as
Sabah Ordinance No 6
of 1962

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No

ACT A1688 Evidence of Child Not Yet Inforce ACT 676

Witness
(Amendment)
Act 2023

ACT A1687 Sexual Offences Not Yet Inforce ACT 792

Against Children
(Amendment)
Act 2023
 ACT A1686 Commercial Not Yet Inforce ACT 334
Vehicle Licensing
Board
(Amendment)
Act 2023

ACT A1685 Land Public Not Yet Inforce ACT 715

Transport
(Amendment)
Act 2023

ACT A1684 Road Transport Not Yet Inforce ACT 333

(Amendment)
Act 2023

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/

Amending Act No

PU(A) 192/2023 Customs (Anti- 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 to 8 PU(A) 384/2021
Dumping Duties) October 2026
(Administrative
Review) (No. 3)
2021
(Amendment)
Order 2023

PU(A) 191/2023 Customs (Anti- 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 to 24 PU(A) 362/2019
Dumping Duties) December 2024
(No. 2) 2019
(Amendment)
Order 2023

PU(A) 190/2023 Customs (Anti- 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 to 11 PU(A) 348/2020
Dumping Duties) December 2025
(No. 3) 2020 except for
(Amendment) subsubparagraph
Order 2023 3(a);
subsubparagraph
3(a) - 1 June 2022
and shall continue to
be in operation until
11 December 2025

PU(A) 189/2023 Stamp Duty 26 June 2023 1 April 2023 ACT 378
(Remission)
(Revocation)
Order 2023

PU(A) 188/2023 Income Tax 23 June 2023 Year of assessment PU(A) 398/2019
(Deduction For 2022
Expenditure
Incurred For
Provision of
Approved
Internship
Programme)
(Amendment)
Rules 2023

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/

Amending Act No
PU(B) 224/2023 Designation and 27 June 2023 Appointment - ACT 349
Revocation of Specified in column
Designation (2) of the First
Under Paragraph Schedule; Revocation
5(1)(b) - Specified in column
(3) of the Second
Schedule

PU(B) 223/2023 Notice of 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 ACT 504

Negative Final
Determination of
Administrative
Review of Anti-
Dumping Duty
With Regard To
Import of Cold
Rolled Coils of
Alloy and Non-
Alloy Steel
Originating Or
Exported From
The Republic of
Korea and The
Socialist Republic
of Viet Nam

PU(B) 222/2023 Notice of 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 ACT 504

Negative Final
Determination of
Administrative
Review of Anti-
Dumping Duty
With Regard To
Import of Cold
Rolled Coils of
Iron Or Non-Alloy
Steel, of Width
More Than
1300mm
Originating Or
Exported From
The Republic of
Korea and The
Socialist Republic
of Viet Nam

PU(B) 221/2023 Notice of 26 June 2023 27 June 2023 ACT 504

Negative Final
Determination of
Administrative
Review of Anti-
Dumping Duty
With Regard To
Imports of Flat
Rolled Product of
Non-Alloy Steel
Plated Or Coated
With Aluminium
and Zinc
Originating Or
Exported From
Tan Phuoc Khanh
Trading &
Manufacturing
Coil Steel Jsc
From The
Socialist Republic
of Viet Nam
 PU(B) 220/2023 Notification of 26 June 2023 1 July 2023 to 31 ACT 235
Values of Crude July 2023
Palm Oil Under
Section 12

Legislation Alert
Copyright © 2023 CLJ Malaysia Sdn Bhd To unsubscribe click here
Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended

PU(A) 203/2018 Sales Tax PU(A) 97/2023 1 April 2023 Regulation 17

Regulations 2018

PU(A) 182/2022 Perintah Duti PU(A) 96/2023 1 April 2023 Perenggan 2

Eksais
(Langkawi) 2022

PU(A) 182/2022 Excise Duties PU(A) 96/2023 1 April 2023 Paragraph 2

(Langkawi) Order
2022

AKTA 812 Akta Kewangan AKTA 845 31 Mei 2023 Seksyen 3

2018

ACT 812 Finance Act 2018 ACT 845 31 May 2023 Section 3

Revoked

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from

PU(A) 369/2019 Perintah Duti PU(A) 189/2023 1 April 2023

Setem
(Peremitan) (No.
2) 2019

PU(A) 369/2019 Stamp Duty PU(A) 189/2023 1 April 2023

(Remission) (No.
2) Order 2019

PU(A) 133/2012 Income Tax PU(A) 166/2023 30 May 2023

(Advance Pricing
Arrangement)
Rules 2012

PU(A) 132/2012 Income Tax PU(A) 165/2023 Year of assessment 2023 and
(Transfer Pricing) subsequent years of assessment
Rules 2012

PU(A) 102/2017 Customs PU(A) 122/2023 15 April 2023

(Prohibition of
Exports) Order
2017