Saturday, 20 May 2017

LN@LERT Vol 4 Part 5









LN@lert.                  Volume 4 Part 5                    11 August 2015
Introduction 
LN@lert is a free email service for legal professionals. It now combines both our MLJ @lert cases and legislation updates (if any).

If you wish to subscribe, please email lnalert@lexisnexis.com and provide us with your name, company name and telephone number. Please feel free to forward this to your colleagues and friends who may be interested to receive the LN@lert.
Cases Published in Volume  4 Part 5


FEDERAL COURT (PUTRAJAYA)
RAUS SHARIF PCA, AHMAD MAAROP, APANDI ALI, ABU SAMAH FFCJ AND AZAHAR MOHAMED JCA
CIVIL APPEAL NOS 02(f)-75-10 OF 2012(W), 02(f)-76-10 OF 2012(W), 02(f)-77-10 OF 2012(W) AND 02(f)-78-10 OF 2012(W)
6 JULY 2015

Company Law
Oppression – Conduct amounting to oppression – Allotment of shares by way of collateral – Winding up of company – Allegation that there was oppression – Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal – Whether test under s 181 should be reconsidered – s 181 of the Companies Act 1965

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Gopal Sri Ram (Elaine Yap, Razinah bt Shaheed Ali, Nimisha Jaya Gobi, Gubachan Singh Pannu) (Wong & Partners) for the appellants.
Cyrus Dass (Reuben Netto, Wong Rhen Yen, Ravenesan S) (Netto & Co) for the respondents.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ZAWAWI SALLEH, ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI AND ZAMANI A RAHIM JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-01(IM)(NCVC)-20-01 OF 2015
3 JUNE 2015

Civil Procedure
Appeal – Notice of appeal – One single notice of appeal filed against eight separate decisions to strike out appellants' claim – Whether notice of appeal bad in law – Whether there was sufficient compliance with statutory requirement – Whether notice of appeal improper for being ambiguous and uncertain – Whether defect in notice could be cure

 Applications allowed and appeal struck out with costs.

Mohd Hafarizam Harun (Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak) for the first and second applicants.
Dhinesh Bhaskaran (Denise Tan Kae Ji with him) (Shearn Delamore & Co) for the third applicant.
Archana Rajagopal (Thangaraj & Assoc) for the fourth applicant.
Darryl SC Goon (Zul Rafique & Partners) for the fifth and sixth applicants.
Satharuban Sivasubramaniam (Satha & Co) for the seventh applicant.
Chong Ian Shin (Arupalam & Co) for the ninth applicant.
Americk Sidhu (Americk Sidhu) for the respondents.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
MOHD HISHAMUDIN, DAVID WONG AND HAMID SULTAN JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO S-02(IM)-1110-06 OF 2014
26 MAY 2015

Companies and Corporations
Secrecy provision – Offence under s 149(1) of the Labuan Companies Act 1990 ('LCA') if confidential information pertaining to affairs of Labuan company disclosed to 'any person' – Whether 'any person' included a 'Court'– Appellants sued by third party in Singapore High Court to produce documents relating to business and affairs of two companies incorporated under LCA – Appellants sought leave of Labuan High Court to disclose confidential documents about those companies in Singapore suit – Whether court had power to grant reliefs sought – Whether Court' in s 149 referred to either High Court of Malaya or High Court of Sabah and Sarawak and to proceedings before those courts and did not include High Court in Singapore – Whether provisions of s 149 of the LCA not vehicle to seek 'leave' or 'permission'  from court to disclose confidential information pertaining to affairs of Labuan company – Whether s 149(1) of the Labuan Companies Act 1990 ('LCA') literally did not bar disclosure to any court of competent jurisdiction whether in Malaysia or elsewhere – s 149(1) of the Labuan Companies Act 1990 ('LCA')

 Appeal dismissed

Rishwant Singh and Carol Pey (Zul Rafique & Partners) for the appellant.
First respondent absent (and unrepresented).
Sharon Chong and Amy Hiews (Skrine) for the second respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ZAWAWI SALLEH, HAMID SULTAN, AND IDRUS HARUN JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-01-4-01 OF 2014
27 MARCH 2015

Labour Law
Industrial Court – Joining of parties – Whether Industrial Relations Act 1967 gave wide powers to Industrial Court to join any party connected to proceedings – Whether no requirement party sought to be joined must be or have been claimant's employer – Whether test to be applied for joinder was whether there was 'reasonable factual or legal nexus' between party sought to be joined and issue before court – Whether Industrial Court on hearing merits following joinder could determine whether party so joined was liable to satisfy award of court

Order accordingly.

Ambiga Sreenevasan (with Shireen Selvaratnam and Azlan Zainal Abidin) (Zainal Abidin & Co) for the appellant.
Datuk Ben Chan Chong Choon (with Alane Neo Hwee Teng) (Mah-Kamariah & Philip Koh) for the third respondent.
Alex Tan Chie Saian (with Dennis Goh Teik Chuan) (Wong Kian Kheong) for the fourth and fifth respondents.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ABDUL WAHAB PATAIL, ZAWAWI SALLEH, UMI KALTHUM JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO B-02–1466–06 OF 2013
9 MARCH 2015

Damages
Claim – Fire – Explosion – Damages to goods and warehouse – Client stored goods in warehouse – Whether fire originated from warehouse's owner – Whether findings of High Court correct

Appeal allowed with costs.

Cyrus Das, S Selvarajah (S Seenivasagam & David Mathews with him) (Azariah & Assoc) for the appellant.
Robin Lim Dou Shing (CY Wong with him) (Azhar & Wong) for the respondents.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
MOHTARUDIN BAKI, AHMADI ASNAWI AND ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI JJCA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS P-05-230 AND 231-09 OF 2012 (IRN)
23 JANUARY 2015

Criminal Law
Dangerous drugs – Trafficking – s 39B(1)(a) – Trafficking in methamphetamine – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Drugs found in cereal boxes inside appellants' bag without any of their personal belongings at Bayan Lepas International Airport – Whether appellant was in possession of drugs with view to traffic – Whether appellants defence probable – Presumption of knowledge – Whether second appellants' conduct indicative of his knowledge as to the existence of drugs – Whether the trial judge had made a finding as to whether the presumption had been rebutted by second appellant – Whether appellate interference warranted – Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ss 37(d) & 39B(1)

Both appeals dismissed and conviction and sentence affirmed.

Tina Ong (Sivananthan) for the first appellant.
Hisyam Teh Poh Teik (Teh Poh Teik & Co) for the second appellant.
Tengku Intan Suraya bt Tengku Ismail (Deputy Public Prosecutor, Attorney General's Chambers) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
LINTON ALBERT, NALLINI PATHMANATHAN AND VERNON ONG JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO B-01–419–12 OF 2013
21 JANUARY 2015

Statutory Interpretation
Construction of statute – Literal and purposive approach – Whether person asserting claim to goods seized by customs had to personally issue to customs written notice of his claim – Monies carried by Iranian at airport seized by customs officers as uncustomed goods – No prosecution preferred – Written statement recorded from Iranian immediately after seizure showed he made known monies were his and that he required it to buy properties – Whether recorded statement sufficient compliance with ss 128(1)(a) and (2) of the Customs Act 1967 to constitute written notice of claim to seized monies – Whether High Court's holding that Iranian had to issue customs separate written notice asserting claim to monies was unduly restrictive interpretation of s 128(2) – s 128(2) of the Customs Act 1967

 Appeal allowed.

Sivanathan (V Yoges with him) (Sivanathan) for the appellant.
Mazlifah Ayob (Peguam Kanan Persekutuan, Bahagian Guaman Jabatan Peguam Negara) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
LINTON ALBERT, NALLINI PATHMANATHAN AND VERNON ONG JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-01-55-02 OF 2013
17 NOVEMBER 2014

Criminal Law
Corruption – Counsel accompanied client to Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission ('MACC') – Client required to give statement – Request to record statements by lawyers by way of notice – Whether notices enforceable – Whether done in good faith – Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009

Appeal dismissed.

Suzana Atan (Senior Federal Counsel, Attorney General's Chambers) for the appellant.
Sivarasa Rasiah (Shahid Adli bin Kamarudin with him) (Daim & Gamani) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ALIZATUL KHAIR, ABDUL AZIZ AB RAHIM AND VARGHESE GEORGE JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO B-03-(IM)-82 OF 2010
14 OCTOBER 2014

Bankruptcy
Creditor's petition – Failure to extract creditor;s petition – Creditor's petition first filed in 1996 – Re-filing of creditor's petition in 2004 due to failure to extract – Granting of receiving and adjudication orders – Time when act of bankruptcy occurred – Affidavit of truth of statement in petition – Whether petition in order – Bankruptcy Act 1967

Appeal allowed.

SS Muker (GK Ganesan and Daljeet Singh with him) (Daljeet S Sachdev & Co) for the appellant.
M Menon (Jaffar & Menon) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
MOHTARUDIN BAKI, AHMADI ASNAWI AND ABDUL RAHMAN SEBLI JJCA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO W-09-94-03 OF 2013
1 OCTOBER 2014

Criminal Procedure
Appeal – Appeal against acquittal and discharge – Offence of breach of trust – Signatories/directors of banks accounts of companies instructed acquisition manager to issue money to fictitious characters – Sessions court acquitted and discharged signatories/directors – Decision affirmed by High Court – Whether prima facie case made out – Whether evidence of acquisition manager admissible – Penal Code s 409

 Appeal allowed.

Sulaiman Kho Kheng Fui (Deputy Public Prosecutor, Attorney General's Chambers) for the appellant.
Haniff Khatri (Haniff Khatri) for the first respondent.
Harcharanjit Singh (Harcharanjit Singh & Assoc) for the second respondent.


New Release

            To purchase, contact our Regional Contact Centre at 1800.88.8856 or email help.my@lexisnexis.com
See all our new book releases on our eBookstore here






CONTACT INFORMATION:
LexisNexis Malaysia
T1-6, Jaya 33, 3, Jalan Semangat, Seksyen 13
46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan
Helpline: 1800-88-8856(LN) Fax: (603) 7882-3501 Website:
http://www.lexisnexis.com.my



LN@LERT Vol 10 Part 5













LN@lert.                   Volume 10 Part 5                    11 August 2015
Introduction 
LN@lert is a free email service for legal professionals. It now combines both our MLJ @lert cases and legislation updates (if any).

If you wish to subscribe, please email lnalert@lexisnexis.com and provide us with your name, company name and telephone number. Please feel free to forward this to your colleagues and friends who may be interested to receive the LN@lert.
Cases Published in Volume  10 Part 5


MAHKAMAH TINGGI (IPOH)
CHE MOHD RUZIMA PK
SAMAN PEMULA NO 24 NCVC-117–10 TAHUN 2013
8 DECEMBER 2014

Prosedur Sivil 
Saman pemula  – Tuntutan untuk milikan – Plaintif menyewa peti simpanan untuk menyimpan barang kemas di bank di bawah nama si bankrap sebagai penyewa – Bank menggantung hak plaintif untuk mengakses peti simpanan – Plaintif mengemukakan penjelasan melalui surat bahawa kesemua barang kemas adalah peninggalan pusaka mendiang ibu dan mendiang suaminya  – Jabatan Insolvensi Malaysia meletak hak 50% barang kemas dalam peti simpanan sebagai milik si bankrap dengan alasan bahawa plaintif gagal membuktikan tuntutannya – Sama ada milikan harta dibuktikan oleh pihak ketiga – Sama ada penjelasan dan bukti sokongan dipertimbangkan sewajarnya – Sama ada si bankrap hanya pemegang amanah kepada harta pihak ketiga – Akta Kebankrapan 1967 s 48(1)(a)(i)

 Tuntutan plaintif dibenarkan.

Surendran (S Surendran & Co) bagi pihak plaintif.
Ahmad Mutaqin (Peguam Kanan Persekutuan, Jabatan Peguam Negara) bagi pihak defendan.


MAHKAMAH TINGGI (KUALA LUMPUR)
HAS ZANAH MEHAT H
GUAMAN NO 22NCC-121–04 TAHUN 2014
12 NOVEMBER 2014

Prosedur Sivil 
Injunksi – Injunksi ex parte  – Pengenepian injunksi mareva ex parte  – Sama ada terdapat kegagalan mendedahkan fakta-fakta penting yang boleh memberi kesan kepada keputusan mahkamah – Sama ada injunksi mareva ex parte diberikan secara salah – Sama ada defendan berhak mendapat ganti rugi 

Prosedur Sivil 
Injunksi – Injunksi ex parte  – Permohonan untuk injunksi mareva secara ex parte  – Sama ada keadilan menyokong pemberian injunksi mareva secara ex parte

Prosedur Sivil 
Injunksi – Injunksi mareva  – Prinsip-prinsip terpakai  – Ujian yang perlu dipertimbangkan dalam membenarkan injunksi mareva – Sama ada terdapat kes yang baik dan kukuh – Sama ada perbuatan defendan yang tidak jujur memungkinkannya melupuskan aset-aset sebelum plaintif memperolehi penghakiman – Sama ada status quo perlu dikekalkan

Permohonan plaintif-plaintif dibenarkan dengan kos dalam kausa dan permohonan defendan-defendan ditolak dengan kos dalam kausa.

Prakash Lachimanan (Christine Frances bersamanya) (Mathews Hun Lachimanan) bagi pihak plaintif.
Nor Suhaina Sulaiman (Aaron Boo bersamanya) (Chew Kar Meng, Zahardin & Partners) bagi pihak defendan pertama.
John Skelchy (James Khong dan Vishal Kumar bersamanya) (James Monteiro) bagi pihak defendan kedua hingga kelima.


HIGH COURT (PULAU PINANG)
S NANTHA BALAN JC
CIVIL SUIT NO 22NCVC-22–01 OF 2012
23 SEPTEMBER 2014

Tort
Defamation – Defences of justification and fair comment – Plaintiff hopped from one political party to another – Plaintiff left Party Keadilan Rakyat and held press conference and lambasted Democratic Action Party ('DAP') – Defendant defended DAP and called plaintif 'frog' or 'frog with no human character' – Whether it was defamatory to call or label politician who changed political parties as 'political frog' or 'frog' or 'frog with no human character' – Whether words in their usual and ordinary meaning bore or could be understood to bear or capable of bearing any defamatory meaning against plaintiff – Whether words complained of were expression of opinion and fair comment

 Claim dismissed.

M Thayalan (Lim Boo Chang & Co) for the plaintiff.
Lee Khai (SS Tham with him) (Ong & Manecksha) for the defendant.


HIGH COURT (PULAU PINANG)
AZMI ARIFFIN JC
CIVIL APPEAL NO 12B-39–04 OF 2014
22 SEPTEMBER 2014

Civil Procedure
Time – Extension of – Application of – Action based on road accident – Delay in filing record and memorandum of appeal for 17 days – Delay attributable to solicitor's temporary office boy – Whether there was blatant infringement of rules which was so significant or serious – Whether such infringement occasioned prejudice to adverse party or to due administration of justice

Application allowed.

Yahaya bin Hahim (Yahaya & Partners) for the appellant.
Malar (Hoe & Ahmad Zaki) for the respondent.


HIGH COURT (SHAH ALAM)
SURAYA OTHMAN J
CIVIL SUIT NO 22–1230 OF 2010
22 AUGUST 2014

Tort
Defamation – Qualified privilege – Whether plaintiff negated defendants' defence of qualified privilege by proving defamatory statements made against her were actuated by malice – Whether defence of justification failed as defendants took no action to show they believed the allegations they made against plaintiff were true

Claim allowed and plaintiff awarded RM150,000 in general damages and her prayers for exemplary damages, an injunction and an apology dismissed.

Jefri Jaafar (Maznah & Jefri) for the plaintiff.
Swinder Singh Ram Singh (Raslan Loong) for the defendants.


HIGH COURT (SHAH ALAM)
AZIMAH OMAR JC
CIVIL SUIT NO MT5-22–758 OF 2009
20 AUGUST 2014

Civil Procedure
Stay of proceedings – Application for – Action for claim of defrauded money – Stay of civil suit pending completion of criminal proceedings – Whether there were special circumstances to grant stay order – Whether there was prejudice against plaintiff from alleged late filing of stay application – Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 ss 4(1), 44(1) & 54(3) – Penal Code s 420 – Rules of Court 2012 O 4 r 1(1)

Enclosure 60 allowed.

Fazillawati Jaafar (Benjamin Dawson) for the plaintiff.
Nur Amalina Haris (KF Ee & Co) for the fifth and sixth defendants.


HIGH COURT (KOTA KINABALU)
CHEW SOO HO J
DIVORCE PETITION NO K-33-22 OF 2011
12 JUNE 2014

Civil Procedure
Stay of execution of judgment – Special circumstances – Wife granted divorce obtained court order in husband's absence to have his legal and beneficial interests in several landed properties transferred to her absolutely – Shares in properties were husband's only assets and source of income to maintain himself and youngest son – Husband failed to act promptly to set aside/appeal order but sought stay of execution thereof to file leave to appeal out of time and/or apply to vary order – Whether husband shown special circumstances why stay should be granted – Whether court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction allowed three-month stay of execution to enable husband to apply for leave to appeal or to vary order

Enclosure 56 dismissed, encls 30 and 67 allowed but execution of the first and second orders stayed for a period of three months only.

Joan Goh Penn Nee (Goh & Assoc) for the respondent.
Shireen Leandra Sikayun (Lee & Thong) for the petitioner.


HIGH COURT (KOTA KINABALU)
CHEW SOO HO J
ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO BKI-24NCC(ARB)-2/12 OF 2013
11 JUNE 2014

Contract
Performance bond – Bank guarantee – Plaintiff obtained ex parte interim injunction to restrain beneficiary from calling on bank guarantee – Plaintiff alleged call on guarantee was unconscionable as beneficiary breached underlying contract with it – Whether court had to consider if dispute between parties based on underlying contract raised serious issues to be tried – Whether balance of convenience and justice of case favoured continuance of injunction and preservation of status quo until dispute between parties resolved/determined

Interim injunction allowed to remain in force until final disposal of dispute between parties.

Catherine Chau (Catherine Chau & Assoc) for the plaintiff.
Gaanesh (Gaanesh & Co) for the defendant.
Adeline Tabad (Fernadez & Co) for the defendant.


New Release


             To purchase, contact our Regional Contact Centre at 1800.88.8856 or email help.my@lexisnexis.com
See all our new book releases on our eBookstore here




CONTACT INFORMATION:
LexisNexis Malaysia
T1-6, Jaya 33, 3, Jalan Semangat, Seksyen 13
46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan
Helpline: 1800-88-8856(LN) Fax: (603) 7882-3501 Website:
http://www.lexisnexis.com.my



LN@LERT Vol 4 Part 6
















LN@lert.                  Volume 4 Part 6                    18 August 2015
Introduction 
LN@lert is a free email service for legal professionals. It now combines both our MLJ @lert cases and legislation updates (if any).

If you wish to subscribe, please email lnalert@lexisnexis.com and provide us with your name, company name and telephone number. Please feel free to forward this to your colleagues and friends who may be interested to receive the LN@lert.
Cases Published in Volume  4 Part 6


FEDERAL COURT (PUTRAJAYA)
RAUS SHARIF PCA, ABDULL HAMID EMBONG, SURIYADI, HASAN LAH, ZAINUN ALI FCJJ
CIVIL APPEAL NOS 01(f)-4–03 OF 2013(W) AND 01(f)-5–03 OF 2013(W)
9 JULY 2015

Constitutional Law
Legislation – Validity of impugned legislation – Minister of Plantation, Industries and Commodities made order for imposition of cess on certain classes of oil palm producers – Respondents as affected oil palm producers challenged validity of Order – Whether order ultra vires Constitution – Whether s 35 valid tax statute – Whether s 35 empowered Minister to impose cess via subsidiary legislation – Whether s 35 contravened art 96 of the Constitution – Whether imposition of cess on a class of parties was a form of discrimination – Whether there was a nexus between basis of classification and object of law – Whether collection of cess for purposes of subsidising price of cooking oil was within purpose of Act

 Appeal allowed with costs.

Zainur Zakaria (Helmi Hamzah, Wan Ahmad Dzaffran Wan Kamaruddin and Nur Khairunnisa Zainal Abidin with him) (Hisham Sobri & Kadir) for the first appellant.
Samsul Bolhassan (Muzila bt Mohamed Arsad with him) (Senior Federal Counsel, Attorney General's Chambers) for the second and third appellants.
Cyrus V Das (T Sudhar with him) (Shook Lin & Bok) for the respondents.


FEDERAL COURT (PUTRAJAYA)
ARIFIN ZAKARIA CHIEF JUSTICE, RICHARD MALANJUM CJ (SABAH AND SARAWAK), SURIYADI, AHMAD MAAROP AND ZAINUN ALI FCJJ
APPEAL NO 02(f)–4–02 OF 2013(P)
2 JULY 2015

Tort
Negligence – Pure economic loss – Claim for – Liability of architects in construction projects – Whether architects owed duty of care to purchasers of units in project – Whether architects were responsible for delay in obtaining CFO – Whether architects could have foreseen any liability for consequential financial loss to appellants arising from their action – Policy considerations – Whether economic loss recoverable

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Cyrus V Das (Siau Suen Miin, Loo Yook Khin, Gregory V Das with him) (Siau Suen Miin & Tan) for the appellant.
Chan Kean Li (Edwin Seibel, Lim Poh Leong, Yap Kok Kheong, Ong Bee Khoon with him) (Gibb) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
AZIAH ALI, ABDUL AZIZ AB RAHIM AND ZAWAWI SALLEH JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-02(NCC)(A)-2672–12 OF 2013
31 JULY 2015

Arbitration
Award – Setting aside final award – Application for – Whether award manifestly unlawful and unconscionable – Whether arbitrator adopted proper approach in construing agreement – Whether arbitrator committed any error of law in construing agreement  – Whether there was need to intervene as to method adopted by arbitrator to assess value of shares – Whether arbitrator erred in awarding pre and post award interest

 Appeals dismissed with costs.

Cyrus Das (Lam Ko Luen, Mohamed Noor Mahmood and Lee Lyn-Ni with him) (Mohamed Noor, Amran & Yoon) for the applicant.
B Thangaraj (Syed Nasarudin Syed Abd Hadi and R Archana with him) (Radzi & Abdullah) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ABDUL WAHAB PATAIL, LINTON ALBERT AND BADARIAH SAHAMID JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO P-01–56–02 OF 2014
2 JULY 2015

Road Traffic
Road – Claim – Pipes supplying treated water would be buried under embankment – Possibility of damages – Plan to relocate affected pipes carried out – Claim for payment refused by highway concessionaire – Whether there was a need to relocate pipes from original location – Whether highway concessionaire obliged to bear the costs of relocating pipes – Whether costs of relocation claimed fair and reasonable

Appellant's appeal on quantum allowed and respondent's cross-appeal on liability dismissed.

Yuslinov bt Ahmad (Sakthi Malar Selvi a/p Perumal K with her) (Yuslinov Ahmad & Petra Oon) for the appellant.
Muralee Nair (Alexius Lee with him) (Idris & Assoc) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ABDUL WAHAB PATAIL, LINTON ALBERT AND BADARIAH SAHAMID JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO B-02–857–05 OF 2014
1 JULY 2015

Contract
Agreement – Sale and purchase – Sale and purchase of land – Whether purchase price paid – Whether vendor would only release original title deeds and original copy of memorandum of transfer to purchaser after full settlement of purchase price

 Appeal allowed with costs.

Lee Chan Leong (Siew Ee Mei with him) (Chan Leong & Co) for the applicant.
Mishant a/l Thiruchelvam (Saiyidah Izzati Nur bt Razak Maideen with him) (Mishant & Co) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ALIZATUL KHAIR, LIM YEE LAN AND NALLINI PATHMANATHAN JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-02(IM)(NCVC)-1362–08 OF 2014
17 JUNE 2015

Civil Procedure
Third party proceedings – Fraudulent bank accounts – Allegation that legal firm suffered losses due to bank's negligence and misappropriation of monies – Whether firm through its partners commenced third party proceedings against bank – Whether there was admission of liability – Whether appellant entitled to contribution from bank as joint tortfeasor – Civil Law Act 1956 s 10(1)(c)

 Appeal allowed with costs.

Prakash Lachimanan (Geetha Supramaniam with him) (Supramaniam & Partners) for the appellant.
Arham Rahimy bin Hariri (Azim, Tunku Farik & Wong) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ABDUL AZIZ AB RAHIM, IDRUS HARUN AND NALLINI PATHMANATHAN JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO W-02(NCVC)(W)-1138–07 OF 2014
15 JUNE 2015

Land Law
Transfer – Void instruments – Whether forged instruments used in transfer of land – Whether registration of names of initial purchasers defeasible – Whether s 340(2) of the National Land Code available to original proprietor – Whether original proprietor could have recourse

 Appeal dismissed with costs.

VS Viswanathan (VS Viswa & Co) for the applicant.
Yusman bin Mohd Badar (Chambers of Yusman Azlin Anwar) for the respondent.


COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA)
ABDUL WAHAB PATAIL, ZAHARAH IBRAHIM AND MOHAMAD ARIFF JJCA
CIVIL APPEAL NO Q-02–3588 OF 2010
7 NOVEMBER 2014

Civil Procedure
Appeal – Record of appeal – Memorandum of appeal not dated – Whether both documents needed to be signed and dated – Whether there was compliance of r 18 of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994 – Whether record of appeal defective – Failure to include amended judgment in record of appeal

 Preliminary objection allowed on first ground; appeals dismissed with costs.

Kenny Yi (Yi & Co) for the appellant.
Albert Tang Yew Liong (Jong Yee Ling with him) (Albert Tang) for the respondent.


New Release


            To purchase, contact our Regional Contact Centre at 1800.88.8856 or email help.my@lexisnexis.com
See all our new book releases on our eBookstore  here





CONTACT INFORMATION:
LexisNexis Malaysia
T1-6, Jaya 33, 3, Jalan Semangat, Seksyen 13
46200 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan
Helpline: 1800-88-8856(LN) Fax: (603) 7882-3501 Website:
http://www.lexisnexis.com.my



Proview eBook Bi-Weekly Offer - Get your copy at 20% off!

Proview eBook Bi-Weekly Offer - Get your copy at 20% off! ...