New This Week

• Case Spotlights

  1. SAYYID SHAH ABDULLAH v. KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA & ANOR [2025] 9 CLJ 610

  2. JUDICIAL QUOTES  

• Latest Cases

  1. Legal Network Series

  2. CLJ 2025 Volume 9 (Part 3)

• Articles

  1. LNS Article(s)

• Legislation Highlights

  1. Principal Acts

  2. Amending Acts

  3. PU(A)

  4. PU(B)

  5. Legislation Alert

CASE SPOTLIGHTS

SAYYID SHAH ABDULLAH v.
KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA & ANOR [2025] 9 CLJ 610
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
SUPANG LIAN JCA; COLLIN LAWRENCE SEQUERAH JCA; ALWI ABDUL WAHAB JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-Q1(A)-691-12-2023]
12 JUNE 2025

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Appeal - Challenge against decision of Director General of National Registration Department ('DGNRD') - Applicant citizen of Malaysia - Applicant born Hindu - Applicant converted to Islam and changed name - Applicant faced difficulties with passport issued under new name - Applications made to DGNRD to change name to original name dismissed - Interpretation of reg. 14 of National Registration Regulations 1990 - Whether applicant entitled to be informed of reasons for decision made by DGNRD

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction of statutes - National Registration Regulations 1990 - Whether envisages change in name from original name to new assumed name but does not envisage change in name back to original name - Implications and consequences that ensue once change of name is effected - Whether requirements for changing name satisfied

JUDICIAL QUOTES

“We find that the High Court's decision in holding that the breath test or blood or urine test under s. 45C of the RTA is mandatory for offences under ss. 44 and 45 involving intoxicating liquor and s. 45A for driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit, and the High Court's setting aside of the respondent's conviction under s. 45A(1) of the RTA were plainly wrong and warrants this court's appellate intervention.”

“Although the DPP during the hearing of this appeal orally informed us that he is not proceeding with the appeal against the respondent's acquittal, he did not withdraw the appeal against the acquittal. Additionally, the fact that the respondent's acquittal was based on the High Court's wrong construction and interpretation of the RTA, means that the acquittal was unsafe.”

“Therefore, the High Court's decision is set aside. The Magistrate's conviction of the respondent under s. 45A(1) of the RTA is restored.” - Per Faizah Jamaludin JCA in PP v. Kannan Letchumanan [2025] CLJU 1507

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

CLJ 2025 Volume 9 (Part 3)

(i) A 'registered manufacturer', under the Sales Tax Act 2018, is defined by its activity of manufacturing 'taxable goods'. Therefore, a manufacturer who produces both taxable and tax-exempted goods is only eligible for the sales tax exemption on imported raw materials under Item 1, Schedule C of the Sales Tax (Persons Exempted From Payment of Tax) Order 2018 if those materials are used to manufacture 'taxable finished goods'; (ii) In Malaysia, a tax relief or exemption provision should be interpreted differently from a tax-charging provision. In a tax relief provision, the taxpayer bears the burden of proving they fall within the scope of the exemption. Ambiguity in such a provision should not be construed in favour of the taxpayer, and a literal interpretation that leads to an absurd outcome should be avoided in favour of a purposive interpretation. This approach aligns with the principles of statutory interpretation in the UK and Australia.
Ketua Pengarah Kastam Jabatan Kastam Diraja Malaysia v. Hong Leong Yamaha Motors Sdn Bhd [2025] 9 CLJ 361 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

(i) The power of the Attorney General ('AG'), under art. 145(3) of the Federal Constitution, to institute 'any proceedings for an offence' is limited to criminal prosecutions and does not extend to civil actions, such as those brought by the Securities Commission ('SC') under s. 90A(5) of the Securities Industry Act 1983 ('SIA'). Consequently, the SC does not require the consent of the AG to initiate a civil action for insider trading under the said provision; (ii) For a person to be held liable for insider trading under s. 89E of the SIA, it must be proven that he knew or ought reasonably to have known that the information was not generally available. The law does not impose strict liability or require proof of an intention to use or improper use of the information; (iii) The courts may determine the materiality of the information by considering facts and circumstances at and after the time of the alleged trade. Post-event information, including the subsequent effect on share price, can be used to prove the information's materiality.
Sreesanthan Eliathamby v. Suruhanjaya Sekuriti Malaysia [2025] 9 CLJ 399 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

An order issued by the Public Prosecutor or an investigating officer, to release seized funds to a third party, is an administrative act and is therefore subject to judicial review. Under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, the power to determine legal ownership of seized property, particularly when such ownership is in dispute, belongs to the civil courts, not the investigating officer or the Public Prosecutor. If a seized property is not forfeited, it must be returned to the person from whom it was seized. The investigating officer and the Public Prosecutor do not have the authority to unilaterally decide that a third party is lawfully entitled to the property, especially when there is a pending civil dispute regarding ownership.
Rosalind Tan Kheng Suan v. Peguam Negara Malaysia & Ors [2025] 9 CLJ 440 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Moneylenders Act 1951 ('MLA') is a special and specific Act for the regulation and control of the business of moneylending not only for the protection of borrowers but also matters connected therewith. A licensed moneylender's demand for an amount computed in breach of the statutory formula prescribed by s. 17 of the Moneylenders Act 1951, amounts to a cause to the contrary so as to disentitle the moneylender to an order for sale of the property charged to the moneylender as security.
MAA Credit Bhd v. Alam Pahlawan Sdn Bhd [2025] 9 CLJ 462 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

(i) The inclusion of a document in Part A of a common bundle of documents does not prevent a party from challenging the validity of such a document (ii) An insurance certificate can be voided ab initio if the proposer makes material misrepresentations in the proposal form. The materiality of a misrepresentation is determined by its significance to the insurance operator's risk assessment. Misrepresenting income and business status, which are central to assessing risk, constitutes a material breach of the duty of utmost good faith.
Mohamad Habizan Mohamad Yussof v. Prudential BSN Takaful Bhd [2025] 9 CLJ 479 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

(i) In a joint and several guarantee agreement that establishes a single relationship in which the guarantor assumes the obligations of a guarantor, with the enhanced liability of a primary obligor, the guarantor cannot claim the protections intended for traditional sureties under the law. The provisions of ss. 92 and 94 of the Contracts Act 1950 are designed to protect traditional sureties, not primary obligors who have contractually assumed direct liability; (ii) Where a party's conduct demonstrates a pattern that constitutes an abuse of process, and the legal and factual deficiencies in the case are manifest and cannot be cured by amendment or further evidence, the 'plain and obvious' test for striking out is clearly satisfied. Prolonged litigation would serve no useful purpose and would only impose unnecessary costs and delay on the parties and the judicial system.
Panjalingam T K Pillay v. Bank Pembangunan Malaysia Bhd [2025] 9 CLJ 511 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

ARTICLES

LNS Article(s)

1. A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF ABU BAKAR JA'AFAR V. PP [2025] CLJU 53 ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by M Visvanathan* [2025] CLJU(A) xcix

[2025] CLJU(A) xcix

MALAYSIA

---

A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF ABU BAKAR JA'AFAR V. PP [2025] CLJU 53

by
M Visvanathan*

This case stems from the sad death of a young man named Muhammad Atif bin Abu Bakar ('the deceased') on 19 December 2022.^[1] At the time of his death, the deceased was 20 years old and pursuing his studies at Institut Latihan Perindustrian Mersing, Johor ('ILP'). According to his father, Abu Bakar bin Ja'afar, the deceased had no physical and/or mental ailments prior to his death and was, for all intents and purposes, in the best of health.

On 17 December 2022, the deceased was said to have just returned to his hostel at ILP Mersing, after spending some time at home with his family in Rompin, Pahang. At about 8 pm on the said date, the deceased was said to have made a phone call to his father, complaining that he was unwell and expressing his wish to return home. Surprised by the phone call, the deceased's father told the deceased to wait for him at the hostel and that he would fetch him home the next morning.

. . .

*Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya; Notary Public; LLB (Hons) London, CLP. The author of this article was the counsel who acted for the deceased's family in this case.

2. THE LAW OF THE SEAT: UNTANGLING THE THREADS OF JURISDICTION IN MALAYSIAN ARBITRATION* ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Steven Perian KC** [2025] CLJU(A) c

[2025] CLJU(A) c

MALAYSIA

---

THE LAW OF THE SEAT: UNTANGLING THE THREADS OF JURISDICTION IN MALAYSIAN ARBITRATION*

by
Steven Perian KC**

ABSTRACT

Jurisdictional clarity is the cornerstone of effective arbitration. In Malaysia, the Arbitration (Amendment) Act 2024 introduces section 9A to the Arbitration Act 2005 to address long-running uncertainty about which law governs an arbitration agreement. This article analyses the doctrinal and policy background to that reform, situates Malaysia's choice in a comparative context (Singapore, Hong Kong and England), and explains how the UK's Arbitration Act 2025 has placed England in the same statutory camp. The analysis integrates five leading judgments — Enka v. Chubb^[1] (UK Supreme Court), Kabab-ji Sal v. Kout Food Group^[2] (UK Supreme Court), BCY v. BCZ^[3] (Singapore High Court), C v. D^[4] (Hong Kong Court of Appeal) and Thai-Lao Lignite Co Ltd & Anor v. Government of The Lao PDR^[5] (Malaysian Federal Court) — and concludes with practical drafting guidance, hypotheticals, and predictions for Malaysian courts.

. . .

*Copyright © 2025 Messrs Rosli Dahlan Saravana Partnership.

**Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK); Member of the Civil Mediation Council (UK); Barrister at 2 King's Bench Walk (UK); Partner at Rosli Dahlan Saravana Partnership (Malaysia); Arbitrator and Mediator with the Asian International Arbitration Centre, and accredited Mediator with the Malaysian International Mediation Centre.

3. 'THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN A CHANGING WORLD'
   INAUGURAL SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DAY LECTURE^{+ [Read excerpt]}
   by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon* [2025] CLJU(A) ci

[2025] CLJU(A) ci

SINGAPORE

---

'THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN A CHANGING WORLD'

INAUGURAL SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DAY LECTURE⁺

by
Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon*

Key Messages

1. To discharge their responsibilities, judges must be competent and they must enjoy legitimacy. Today, there are numerous challenges that affect one or both of these essential elements: (a) global geopolitical and economic challenges; (b) the phenomenon of the growing complexity of disputes; (c) challenges arising from greater interconnectedness between jurisdictions; (d) rising barriers against access to justice; (e) the proliferation of disinformation and the devaluation of truth; and (f) a breakdown of trust in public institutions.

2. These challenges come together to form a "perfect long storm" bearing down on judiciaries across the world. Within the constraints of judicial independence and the separation of powers, judiciaries must urgently mount a robust response to these challenges.

3. For a start, this response should involve three ways in which the judicial role ought to evolve. First, court systems must become more user-centric, with the courts providing adequate legal information and practical assistance to court users, and engaging in public communications and outreach. Second, judiciaries should work to enhance judicial competencies, by investing in judicial education and training, and pursuing continuous innovation in areas such as increasing the efficiency of the conduct of litigation. Third, judiciaries should promote international judicial engagement, which includes formal and informal collaboration between courts across jurisdictions, as well as the development of a transnational system of justice.

. . .

+Reproduced with permission of the Singapore Courts: https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/news-and-resources/news/news-details/chief-justice-sundaresh-menon-speech-delivered-at-the-inaugural-supreme-court-of-india-day-lecture.

*Supreme Court of Singapore.

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert