Print this page
CLJ Pulse Header
Issue #23/2025
05 June 2025

Subscribe now to make the most of this legal bulletin and have full access to judgments and other documents.

New This Week

CASE SPOTLIGHTS

THE NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS (MALAYSIA) BHD v.
AIDEAH COMMUNICATION SDN BHD [2025] 5 CLJ 661
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF FCJ; AB KARIM AB JALIL FCJ; AHMAD TERRIRUDIN MOHD SALLEH FCJ
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: 02(f)-30-08-2024(W)]
8 APRIL 2025

(i) The inclusion of a 'reasonable endeavours' clause in a commercial agreement for securing advertisements, particularly in an industry subject to external market forces, provides a pragmatic and commercially sensible benchmark for the obligor's performance. This clause acknowledges the inherent unpredictability of the advertising market and aligns the obligor's obligations with these dynamics, functioning as a 'soft target' reflecting the parties' intentions at the time of the agreement; (ii) The contra proferentum rule is a last resort rule to be applied only when there is genuine ambiguity in the terms of a contract after exhausting other methods of interpretation to ascertain the parties' intentions.

CONTRACT: Agreement - Revenue sharing publication agreement - Editorial and advertisements in newspapers - Claim for payments for commissions and counterclaim for counter surcharge for shortfall of minimum guaranteed sum - Principles of contra proferentum and reasonable endeavours - Effect of 'reasonable endeavours' clause in contract - Whether can negate consideration obligation in ss. 10(1) and 26 of Contracts Act 1950 - Whether creates uncertainty and ambiguity by dissolving rights, liabilities and obligations of parties in contract - Whether burden of proof to enable reliance on 'reasonable endeavours' clause in contract lies on obligor - Whether generalia specialibus non derogant to be applied when construing specific contractual obligation over general 'reasonable endeavours' clause - Whether contra proferentum rule takes precedence over other modes of construction

JUDICIAL QUOTES

If all commercial banks in Malaysia are to impose the same exclusion clause as the respondent bank in this case when handling overseas remittance for their customers, there is much for the customers to worry about. This is so because the respondent bank takes the position that it is entitled to rely on exclusion clauses in its remittance form to disclaim all liabilities if the customer's money had been erroneously credited into the bank account of someone whose name is completely different from the beneficiary/payee's name stated in the remittance form.. – Per Gan Techiong JC in Anish Resources Sdn Bhd v. Public Bank Bhd [2025] CLJU 1027

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2025] CLJU 38

EDGENTA MEDISERVE SDN BHD v. INDUSTRI PEMBINAAN MALAYSIA

Failure to make full and frank disclosure of all relevant facts in a statement and affidavit in support of an application for leave to commence committal proceedings is a conduct that can be construed as a deliberate suppression of facts and a serious abuse of the court process.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Contempt of court - Committal proceedings - Leave to commence committal proceedings - Whether failure to specify time for doing an act in an order is fatal to committal proceedings - Whether application was premature and an abuse of court process - Whether application disclosed a prima facie case for contempt - Whether applicant had made full and frank disclosure of all relevant facts in statement and affidavit - Whether there was suppression of facts and a serious abuse of court process - Whether applicant had resorted all other avenues before resorting to committal proceedings - Rules of Court 2012, O. 52 r. 3

  • For the applicant - Hor Shirley & Marc Adrian Emuang; M/s Raja Darryl & Loh
  • For the respondents - David Mathew, Chong Jen Hui & David Ng Yew Kiat; M/s Steven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership

[2025] CLJU 39

S3 VENTURES SDN BHD v. ORAVEL STAYS SINGAPORE PTE LTD & ANOR

1. An agreement is validly terminated if the termination took effect after the lock-in period as stated in the agreement. Mere issuance of notice of termination before the lock-in period will not render the termination invalid if the termination took effect after the said period.

2. The defendants’ action in manually moving customers who had booked to stay at the plaintiff's hotel to a different hotel belonging to the defendants is interference with the plaintiff's trade or business with an object to causing damage to the plaintiff. Similarly, their action in not handing over all the online travel agents or notifying the online travel agents of the termination of the agreement between the plaintiff and defendants unlawfully interfered with the plaintiff's trade or business at the plaintiff's hotel.

CONTRACT: Agreement - Breach - Marketing and operational consulting agreement - Breach of post-contractual obligations - Whether defendants had breached terms of agreement - Whether defendants had wrongly charged plaintiff management fees - Whether agreement was validly terminated by plaintiff

TORT: Unlawful interference - Trade and business - Business sabotage - Charging management and service charge despite waiver stated in agreement - Unilateral lowering of hotel room price - Moving customers to defendants’ hotel - Whether defendants through their conduct had committed tort of unlawful interference with hotel's trade and business - Whether defendants’ act caused damage to plaintiff's business 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: Trade mark - Infringement - Defendants continued to use plaintiff's brand name and trademark after termination of agreement - Co-branding - Whether defendants were allowed to use plaintiff's name and trademark after termination of agreement 

  • For the plaintiff - Kirubagaran Baskaran & Siti Nor Arifiyah Subahudin; M/s B B Kiru & Partner
  • For the defendants - Soh Gee Kian & Noor Syazleen Azmira Mohamad; M/s GK Soh & Partners

[2025] CLJU 41

MMIP SERVICES SDN BHD & ORS v. R MANOKARAN & ORS

1. A party who had willingly accepted and submitted to the jurisdiction of a foreign court without taking any measures to challenge or address the issue of jurisdiction in that foreign court proceedings cannot later file an application in Malaysian Courts to set aside the judgment obtained from the foreign court. In such circumstances, the issue of forum non conveniens is no longer relevant since a full trial has established the liabilities of that party in the foreign court.

2. Where a claim had already been decided on liability, arising from an accident which occurred in Malaysia, after a full trial at Singapore Court and is merely awaiting the process for assessing damages, then Singapore Court is the most appropriate forum to hear assessment of damages. The principles of natural justice will be upheld by respecting the jurisdiction of the Singapore Court, which has already issued a judgment on liability.

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judgments and orders - Setting aside - Registered foreign judgments - Judgment obtained from Singapore Court after full trial - Applicant alleged Selayang Court as having jurisdiction to hear claim premised on accident that took place in Malaysia - Claim pending assessment of damages - Whether applicant had submitted to jurisdiction of High Court of Singapore - Whether issue of forum conveniens was relevant

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction - Forum - Accident occurred in Malaysia - Action filed in Singapore - Whether Malaysian Court is more appropriate forum to hear accident claims - Whether Zoom hearings are convenient for witnesses from Singapore - Whether allowing respondents to maintain their cases in Singapore is tantamount to forum shopping - Whether witnesses from Malaysia are fewer in number

  • For the applicants - Silva Velu; M/s Silva Velu & Co
  • For the respondents - Aufa Radzi & Tee Wei Herng Calvin; M/s Skrine

[2025] CLJU 47

ELIZABETH GUANDAS & SATU LAGI lwn. VIJAYAN KUMARAN & SATU LAGI

1. Tindakan pemandu motolori yang telah meletakkan motolori di bahu jalan dan bukan di tempat yang dikhaskan untuk parkir yang menyebabkan berlakunya kemalangan adalah satu kecuaian. Namun demikian, kenderaan yang melanggar motolori yang diparkir tersebut boleh turut cuai sumbang dalam kemalangan jika pemandu kenderaan yang melanggar motolori tersebut memandu dengan laju.

2. Pihak yang menuntut perlu memberi keterangan kepada Mahkamah. Suatu tuntutan kehilangan tanggungan boleh ditolak jika pihak yang menuntut tidak hadir sendiri untuk memberi keterangan di Mahkamah dan tanpa penjelasan yang munasabah atas kegagalannya untuk hadir ke Mahkamah. Kegagalan memberi keterangan di Mahkamah boleh mengaktifkan anggapan bertentangan di bawah s. 114(g) Akta Keterangan 1950.

TORT: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Liabiliti - Motokar melanggar motolori yang diparkir di kawasan mulut simpang - Versi yang bertentangan - Keterangan senyap - Kerosakan teruk pada motorkar - Sama ada motolori diparkir di kawasan larangan untuk memarkir kenderaan - Sama ada pemandu motorlori adalah cuai - Sama ada terdapat cuai sumbang oleh pemandu motorkar - Sama ada kerosakan teruk pada motorkar adalah konsisten dengan pemanduan laju motorkar

GANTI RUGI: Tindakan - Kehilangan tanggungan - Tuntutan oleh ibu si mati - Ibu si mati tidak memberi keterangan di Mahkamah - Sama ada penolakan untuk perbelanjaan semasa hayat si mati telah dibuat sebelum menentukan jumlah gaji bersih si mati - Sama ada tuntutan tanggungan ibu si mati wajar dibenarkan - Sama ada tuntutan kahilangan tanggungan mencurigakan - Sama ada anggapan bertentangan di bawah s. 114(g) Akta Keterangan 1950 terpakai atas kegagalan memberi keterangan untuk menyokong tuntutan 

  • Bagi pihak perayu-perayu/plaintif-plaintif - T/n B Mariammah & Co 
  • Bagi pihak responden-responden/defendan-defendan - T/n Veni & Associates 

[2025] CLJU 50

SUKARDIN SHA'ARI lwn. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA & YANG LAIN

Pematuhan kepada tarikh akhir sesuatu tindakan atau perkara yang diperuntukkan di bawah sesuatu Akta Parlimen sebagai suatu soalan fakta adalah bergantung kepada interpretasi Mahkamah yang menilai berdasarkan keterangan dan kronologi fakta yang munasabah. Dalam keadaan apabila sesebuah Akta Parlimen secara khusus tidak memperuntukkan tempoh masa spesifik untuk sesuatu tindakan dilaksanakan, tindakan tersebut hendaklah dilaksanakan dalam tempoh kesegeraan yang praktik sepertimana yang dinyatakan di dalam s. 54(2) Akta Tafsiran 1948 & 1967.

PENAHANAN PENCEGAHAN: Perintah tahanan - Permohonan untuk habeas corpus - Tahanan di bawah s. 6(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 - Sama ada terdapat kelewatan tidak munasabah dalam mendapatkan rakaman percakapan orang yang ditahan - Sama ada laporan lengkap penyiasatan dan laporan bertulis telah dilengkapkan dan dikemukakan dalam tempoh kesegeraan praktik dan tanpa sebarang kelengahan yang melampau

CLJ 2025 Volume 5 (Part 4)

The granting of a habeas corpus order simply means that a detention is found to be unlawful for the purposes of immediate release. The fact that a habeas corpus order is issued, however, does not automatically translate to liability for false imprisonment. In order to claim damages for unlawful detention, through the tort of false imprisonment, one must still prove the elements of that specific tort in a separate civil suit.
Sri Sanjeevan Ramakrishnan v. ASP Poonnam E Keling & Ors [2025] 5 CLJ 509 [FC]

|

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Habeas corpus - Remand - Wrong and unlawful detention - Applicant obtained writ of habeas corpus and released - Claim for tort of false imprisonment - Whether issuance of habeas corpus order automatically translated to liability for false imprisonment - Prevention of Crime Act 1959, s. 3

TORT: False imprisonment - Damages - Claim - Applicant successful in application for writ of habeas corpus and immediately released - Claim for tort of false imprisonment - Whether issuance of habeas corpus order automatically translated to liability for false imprisonment - Federal Constitution, arts. 5(1) & (2)

 

Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal FCJ
Ab Karim Ab Jalil FCJ
Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera FCJ

  • For the appellant - Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Preakas Sampunathan, Satchitanandan Vedha Ratnam, Khoo Suk Chyi & Komal Vijay Sheth; M/s Preakas & Partners
  • For the respondents - Mohammad Al-Saifi Hj Hashim, Liew Horng Bin & Nur Ezdiani Roleb; SFCs

In order to prove the obtainment of wayleave to erect electricity transmission towers and power lines across plots of land, the burden lies on Tenaga Nasional Bhd ('TNB') that it has complied with one of the following procedures: (i) wayleave procedures under s. 53 of the Electricity Act 1949 ('Act') (now s. 11 of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 ('ESA')). In this instance, once the procedures are complied with, TNB shall be deemed to have obtained a valid wayleave; or (ii) wayleave agreement under s. 56 of the Act (now s. 15 of the ESA). This instance provides for 'saving' or 'exception' wherein the right of entry and wayleave is mutually negotiated and codified into an agreement and parties are exempted from complying with the procedures under s. 53 of the Act. The entire pre-requisites and procedures under s. 53 should not override a wayleave obtained via a wayleave agreement entered under s. 56 of the Act.
Mohd Azman Yaacob v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd [2025] 5 CLJ 531 [CA]

|

TORT: Trespass - Trespass to land - Erection of electricity transmission towers and power lines - Wayleave obtained in 1979 - Whether complied with guidelines for transmission lines - Requisite wayleave procedures under Electricity Act 1949 - Whether obtained wayleave via notification under s. 53 - Whether State Authority's cooperation and involvement sufficiently proper - Whether failure to endorse wayleave upon instrument document of title justified - Whether trespass proven

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction - Statutes - Electricity Act 1949 - Wayleave procedures - Wayleave obtained in 1979 - Law at that time did not require endorsement of wayleave onto instrument document of title - Whether wayleave complied with law at that time

 

 

S Nantha Balan JCA
Azimah Omar JCA
Azmi Ariffin JCA

  • For the appellants - Wan Jawahir Harun & Mohd Khuzaimi Mohd Salleh; M/s Wan Jawahir & Takiyuddin
  • For the respondent - David Mathew, David Ng Yew Kiat & Ananthan Moorthi; M/s Seteven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership

(i) Civil courts are limited to ensuring that Syariah Courts act within their jurisdiction. Their role is to ensure that the Syariah Courts do not exceed their prescribed legal boundaries. Beyond this jurisdictional check, the civil courts are not permitted to delve into or alter the substantive decisions made by the Syariah Courts. This principle of judicial non-interference is crucial for maintaining the independence of the Syariah Courts, allowing them to render decisions on Islamic law matters without external encroachment; (ii) Section 229(3) of the Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998 has properly conferred Syariah Courts with jurisdiction to commence contempt proceedings and punish for contempt itself. This power is given under a written law. As such, civil courts are not in a position to disturb any issuance of a notice to show cause made by the Syariah Courts.
Peguam Negara Malaysia v. Maria Chin Abdullah [2025] 5 CLJ 550 [CA]

| |

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Leave to commence - Appeal against - Respondent challenged decision of Syariah Court in granting leave order to commence contempt proceedings and notice to show cause - Jurisdiction and authority vested in Syariah Courts - Whether essential power to handle contempt proceedings provided in s. 229 of Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998 - Whether decision made within jurisdiction of Syariah Court could be reversed by civil courts - Whether notice to show cause decision amenable to judicial review - Whether application for judicial review premature - Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 - Federal Constitution, art. 121(1A) & Ninth Schedule, State List, item 1

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction - Civil courts and Syariah Courts - Whether civil courts permitted to delve into or alter substantive decisions made by Syariah Courts - Whether civil courts limited to ensuring Syariah Courts act within their jurisdiction - Whether decision made within jurisdiction of Syariah Court could be reversed by civil courts - Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998, s. 229 - Federal Constitution art. 121(1A) & Ninth Schedule, State List, item 1

WORDS & PHRASES: 'the constitution, organization and procedure to Syariah Courts' - Interpretation - Whether construed in comprehensive manner - Whether to ensure Syariah Courts possess full suite of judicial powers required to effectively administer justice in Islamic law matters - Syariah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998, s. 229 - Federal Constitution art. 121(1A) & Ninth Schedule, State List, item 1

Mariana Yahya JCA
Mohd Nazlan Ghazali JCA
Azman Abdullah JCA

  • For the appellant - Ahmad Hanir Hambaly; AG's Chambers
  • For the respondent - Rosli Dahalan, Zeti Zulfah Hassan, Amiratu Al Amirat Saleh Mohamed Garbaa & Elani Mazlan; M/s Nurul Hafidzah & Assocs
  • Watching Brief on behalf of Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur - Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar & Danial Farhan Zainul Rijal; M/s Zainul Rijal

The exercise of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's ('YDPA') prerogative of mercy under art. 42 of the Federal Constitution is a matter of the YDPA's sole discretion and is not susceptible to judicial review. Consequently, the decision-making process leading to the granting of pardon, including the advice of the Pardons Board, is also not justiciable.
Badan Peguam Malaysia v. Lembaga Pengampunan Wilayah-wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, Labuan Dan Putrajaya & Anor [2025] 5 CLJ 579 [HC]

|

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Federal Constitution - Article 42 - Royal prerogative of mercy by Yang di-Pertuan Agong ('YDPA') - Whether relief sought by applicant directed at challenging royal prerogative of mercy of YDPA - Whether prerogative direct exercise of YDPA's sole discretion and not Pardons Board or power delegated to Pardons Board - Whether such prerogative susceptible to judicial review - Whether reliefs sought justiciable to judicial review

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Application for - Royal prerogative of mercy by Yang di-Pertuan Agong ('YDPA') - Whether relief sought by applicant directed at challenging royal prerogative of mercy of YDPA - Whether prerogative direct exercise of YDPA's sole discretion and not Pardons Board or power delegated to Pardons Board - Whether such prerogativ susceptible to judicial review - Whether reliefs sought justiciable to judicial review - Feederal Constitution, art. 42

 

Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid J

  • For the applicant - Zainur Zakaria, Yeo Yang Poh & Rajpal Singh Ghai; M/s Amir & Rajpal Singh
  • For the Honourable Attorney General - Ahmad Hanir Hambaly; SFC & Imtiyaz Wizni Aufa Othman; FC
  • For the 2nd putative respondent - Mohamed Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Muhammad Farhan Shafee & Wan Mohammad Arfan Wan Othman; M/s Shafee & Co

If a deceased person has a valid will, the Administration of Native and Small Estates Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap. 1) ('ANSEO') provisions for distribution of intestate estates ('Jadual Tiga') do not apply to those named executor in the will. A Jadual Tiga obtained without considering a valid will is void ab initio. Further, failure to adhere to procedural requirements under the ANSEO, such as proper notice, can invalidate a Jadual Tiga.
Darius Hoindi v. Thomas Hinjiang & Ors [2025] 5 CLJ 604 [HC]

|

SUCCESSION: Will - Estate of native - Native/deceased died testate - Deceased had one child but bequeathed parcel of land to nephew - Child obtained 'Jadual Tiga' from Native Court under Administration of Native and Small Estates Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap. 1) based on assumption deceased died intestate - Deceased's will not presented at hearing of Jadual Tiga - High Court granted nephew grant of probate under Probate and Administration Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap. 109) - Nephew recognised as executor - Land Office acted on grant of probate and transferred land to nephew - Whether one order is to prevail over other - Whether order of Native Court may be set aside or attacked - Whether Jadual Tiga obtained without considering valid will void ab initio

NATIVE LAW & CUSTOM: Land dispute - Will - Deceased had one child but bequeathed parcel of land to nephew - Child obtained 'Jadual Tiga' from Native Court under Administration of Native and Small Estates Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap. 1) based on assumption deceased died intestate - Deceased's will not presented at hearing of Jadual Tiga - High Court granted nephew grant of probate under Probate and Administration Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap. 109) - Nephew recognised as executor - Land Office acted on grant of probate and transferred land to nephew - Whether one order is to prevail over other - Whether order of Native Court may be set aside or attacked

 

Lim Hock Leng J

  • For the plaintiff - Trevor Maringking; M/s Maringking & Co
  • For the 1st defendant - Emmie Martin; M/s Miram & Co
  • For the 2nd defendant - Chang Vun Shin; M/s Chang & Wong Partners
  • For the 3rd & 4th defendants - Dulce Milus Majawit; AG's Chambers

An arbitrator in Malaysia is bound by the doctrine of stare decisis and must, therefore, consider the Malaysian common law, as developed through Malaysian court decisions, in arriving at his arbitral award.
Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur v. Sri Tinggi Sdn Bhd [2025] 5 CLJ 630 [HC]

ARBITRATION: Award - Decision of arbitrator - Arbitration proceedings - Arbitrator's decision disregarded established Malaysian case laws - Whether doctrine of stare decisis applies to arbitration - Whether there was fundamental error in arbitrator's decision - Whether arbitrator acted outside jurisdiction

ARBITRATION: Award - Decision of arbitrator - Arbitration proceedings - Arbitrator's failure to consider Malaysian public policy - Whether constituted breach of natural justice

 

 

Nadzarin Wok Nordin J

(Originating Summons No: WA-24C(ARB)-30-05-2024)
  • For the plaintiff - Rishwant Singh, Mohd Irwan Ismail & Karamjit Singh; M/s Bhadarul Baharain & Partners
  • For the defendant - Richard Kok Chi Wei; M/s Richard Kok
(Originating Summons No: WA-24C(ARB)-16-03-2024)
  • For the plaintiff - Richard Kok Chi Wei; M/s Richard Kok
  • For the defendant - Rishwant Singh, Mohd Irwan Ismail & Karamjit Singh; M/s Bhadarul Baharain & Partners

To establish an offence under s. 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, ie, posting offensive comments, the prosecution must prove mens rea, specifically that the accused intended to injure the feelings of others. A lack of awareness of the nature and consequences of the act due to mental instability negates the element of mens rea. Proof of actus reus alone, ie, the act of posting alone, is insufficient to establish a prima facie case without proof of mens rea.
PP v. Sharil Mohd Sarif [2025] 5 CLJ 649 [HC]

| |

CYBER LAW: Improper use of network facilities - Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, s. 233(1)(a) - Accused charged for posting on Twitter application offensive comment directed at individuals which had effect of annoyance and insult - Whether elements of charge established - Whether accused had used Twitter application to upload communication - Whether communication offensive - Whether communication uploaded with intent to injure feelings of others - Whether actus reus and mens rea established

CRIMINAL LAW: Defences - Legal insanity - Accused charged for posting on Twitter application offensive comment directed at individuals which had effect of annoyance and insult - Accused pleaded defence of insanity during act of posting - Whether defence available to accused - Whether accused mentally unstable and not aware at all that what he did was contrary to law - Whether mens rea established - Penal Code, s. 84 - Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, s. 233(1)(a)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal by prosecution - Acquittal and discharge - Accused charged for posting on Twitter application offensive comment directed at individuals which had effect of annoyance and insult - Whether elements of charge established - Whether accused had used Twitter application to upload communication - Whether communication offensive - Whether communication uploaded with intent to injure feelings of others - Whether actus reus and mens rea established

Muniandy Kannyappan J

  • For the prosecution/appellant - Zaileen Nadia Zubir; DPP
  • For the respondent/accused - Pang Tek Kit; M/s TK Pang

 

ARTICLES

CLJ Article(s)

  1. 'EMPOWERING THE NEXT GENERATION OF LEGAL LEADERS IN MALAYSIA'* [Read excerpt]
    by YAA Dato' Sri Hasnah Binti Dato' Mohammed Hashim Chief Judge Malaya [2025] 5 CLJ(A) i

    2. [2025] 5 CLJ(A) i
    MALAYSIA

    'EMPOWERING THE NEXT GENERATION OF LEGAL LEADERS IN MALAYSIA'*

    by
    YAA Dato' Sri Hasnah Binti Dato' Mohammed Hashim
    Chief Judge Malaya

    Salutations

    Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
    Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and a very good morning.

    Introduction

    [1] I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the Legal & Business Academy of Malaysia (LBAM) for the kind invitation to speak at the Young Lawyers Forum 2025. It is truly an honour to address you all today. I also wish to convey my heartfelt congratulations to LBAM for its commendable efforts in organising this forum for the very first time - a significant and laudable initiative for the legal fraternity.

    [2] The theme of this forum, 'Empowering The Next Generation of Legal Leaders in Malaysia', underscores the vital importance of nurturing leadership within the legal fraternity. Preparing future legal practitioners with the knowledge, skills, and mindset needed to navigate emerging challenges is essential to ensuring the continued strength, relevance, and integrity of our profession.

    . . .

    * Delivered At The Young Lawyers Forum, Asian International Arbitration Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Saturday, 22 February 2025.

LNS Article(s)

  1. 'HEALING BUSINESSES IN A NEW WORLD: PROBLEMS, OPPORTUNITIES AND SOLUTIONS'
    SPEECH DELIVERED AT CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY ON 27 MARCH 2024+         [Read excerpt]
    by Justice Kannan Ramesh* [2025] CLJU(A) xlix

    2. [2025] CLJU(A) xlix
    SINGAPORE

    'HEALING BUSINESSES IN A NEW WORLD: PROBLEMS, OPPORTUNITIES AND SOLUTIONS'

    SPEECH DELIVERED AT CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY ON 27 MARCH 2024+

    by
    Justice Kannan Ramesh*

    Distinguished guests
    Ladies and gentlemen

    I. Introduction

    1. A very good afternoon, and thank you for joining us today. It is my privilege to address you for the fourth session in the "Conversations with the Community" series organised by the Singapore Courts. The theme for the conversation this afternoon is about troubled businesses in an uncertain world. The theme poses the fundamental question: what is the objective of an insolvency and restructuring ("R&I") regime?

    2. The answer varies depending on the circumstances and it is simplistic to analyse the question on a purely creditor/shareholder axis. As Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon observed in his keynote address at the 18th Annual Conference of the International Insolvency Institute in 2018, insolvency law and practice is, at its core, about the endeavour to recycle capital to maximise the prospects of business recovery, and when this is not possible, to maximise the realisation of value.[1] Inherent in this endeavour lies the need to reconcile a myriad of conflicting interests, which includes the rights of the debtor and the creditors, and the needs of society in general.[2] The precise objectives of an effective R&I regime will therefore depend on what each society believes is the appropriate balance between these interests, based on the prevailing domestic and global commercial landscape, and societal considerations.

    . . .

    + Reproduced with permission of the Singapore Courts: https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/news-and-resources/news/news-details/justice-kannan-ramesh--speech-delivered-at-conversations-with-the-community-on-27-march-2024.

    *Supreme Court of Singapore.

  2. 'CONSTRUCTING COLLABORATION: REMOULDING THE RESOLUTION OF CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES'
    SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE 9TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF CONSTRUCTION LAWYERS+         [Read excerpt]
    by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon* [2025] CLJU(A) l

    3. [2025] CLJU(A) l
    SINGAPORE

    'CONSTRUCTING COLLABORATION: REMOULDING THE RESOLUTION OF CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES'

    SPEECH DELIVERED AT THE 9TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF CONSTRUCTION LAWYERS+

    by
    Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon*

    Key Messages

    1. Enhancing and expanding collaboration will be central to promoting the efficient, holistic and proportionate management of construction disputes.

    2. Construction disputes present two pressing problems. First, they are becoming increasingly complex, in both technical and evidential dimensions. Second, existing dispute resolution tools are not adequately contextualised to the circumstances of each dispute, owing to their adversarial nature, their prevalent focus on legal rights, and their generic designs.

    3. To address these problems, we should enhance and expand collaboration, both between the parties to construction projects and disputes, and also between the dispute resolution bodies that handle such disputes. Lessons can be drawn from the efforts made by the Singapore courts in reforming family justice. These include pursuing early intervention, triaging cases to direct each dispute to the most suitable procedure, harnessing multidisciplinary expertise, as well as raising awareness of new tools and inculcating appropriate mindsets. We should apply all of these strategies to entrench the collaborative ethos that can already be found in construction practice and construction dispute resolution.

    . . .

    +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-9th-annual-conference-of-the-international-academy-of-construction-lawyers

    *Supreme Court of Singapore.

  3. SARAWAK'S OIL MINING ORDINANCE 1958: AN EXISTENTIAL INDETERMINACY? [Read excerpt]
    by Ling Hui Chuan* [2025] CLJU(A) li

    4. [2025] CLJU(A) li
    MALAYSIA

    SARAWAK'S OIL MINING ORDINANCE 1958: AN EXISTENTIAL INDETERMINACY?

    by
    Ling Hui Chuan*

    INTRODUCTION

    This article addresses the issue that revolves around inter-governmental and federal-state discussions on the rights to petroleum resources by a member state or territory vis-a-vis the Federation of Malaysia. This writing will attempt to tackle the issue from a legal standpoint in the context of Sarawak despite the apparent political consensus on the matter.[1]

    The issue is formulated as such:

    What is the applicable law regulating petroleum activities (including discovery, prospecting and mining activities) carried out in Sarawak: the Sarawak's Oil Mining Ordinance [Cap. 85] (hereinafter referred to as 'Sarawak's OMO') or Federation's Petroleum Mining Act 1966 [Act 95] plus Petroleum Development Act 1974? [Act 144]

    . . .

    These questions are now for the readers to decide for themselves.

    *LLB (Hons), CLP; Magistrate at the Kuching Court Complex.

  4. A LEGAL ATTEMPT TO DEFINE AND CLASSIFY DIGITAL PLAY IN MALAYSIA: JURIDICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ONLINE GAMBLING, E-SPORTS AND FANTASY SPORTS IN AUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA* [Read excerpt]
    by Sharifah Zulia Balqish S Agil[i] Dr Rafizah Abu Hassan[ii] Dr Nasreen Miza Hilmy Nasrijal[iii] Associate Prof Dr Hartini Saripan[iv] [2025] CLJU(A) lii

    5. [2025] CLJU(A) lii
    INTERNATIONAL

    A LEGAL ATTEMPT TO DEFINE AND CLASSIFY DIGITAL PLAY IN MALAYSIA:
    JURIDICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ONLINE GAMBLING, E-SPORTS AND
    FANTASY SPORTS IN AUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA*

    by
    Sharifah Zulia Balqish S Agil[i]
    Dr Rafizah Abu Hassan[ii]
    Dr Nasreen Miza Hilmy Nasrijal[iii]
    Associate Prof Dr Hartini Saripan[iv]

    ABSTRACT

    The swift advancement of technology vicissitudes the anatomy of digital play, arguably consisting of online gambling, e-sports and fantasy sports. This simultaneously multiplies the risk of gambling and gaming disorder on respective gamblers and players. The current Malaysian legal framework specifically provides for the determination of traditional gambling activity by the dichotomy of chance or a combination of chance and skill and not pure skill. However, the same cannot be said for online gambling, e-sports, and fantasy sports, despite similarities in their anatomy. This paper aims to address this gap. This paper commences by conceptualising the anatomy of digital play, followed by a brief discussion of the features of chance and skill elements in online gambling, e-sports and fantasy sports. This paper proceeds to consider the legal approaches to chance and skill elements in Malaysia, Australia and the United States of America. Ultimately, this paper attempts to suggest that e-sports and fantasy sports should be acknowledged as legal exceptions in the definition and classification of online gambling under Malaysian law. The surging calls to understand elements forming online gambling have increased the pressing scrutiny surrounding the legal aspects of these activities. There is an exigent need to legally harmonise the definition and classification of various activities resembling online gambling in fortifying the bulwark of members of society against the menace brought by gambling disorder.

    . . .

    *Part of this paper was presented at the UiTMLAW - UNAIR Colloquium organised by Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia and Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia on 17 October 2022.

    [i] Corresponding author; PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia; Senior Legal Officer, Attorney General's Chambers, Malaysia. E-mail: szbalqish@gmail.com.

    [ii] Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

    [iii] Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

    [iv] Legal Advisor and Senior Lecturer, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title In force from Repealed Superseded
ACT 867 Government Service Efficiency Commitment Act 2025 Not Yet In Force - -
ACT 866 Online Safety Act 2025 Not Yet In Force - -
ACT 864 Data Sharing Act 2025 Not Yet In Force - -
ACT 863 Measures For The Collection, Administration and Enforcement of Tax Act 2024 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s 3; the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s 10; the Stamp Act 1949 [Act 378] see s 20; the Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 43; the Windfall Profit Levy Act 1998 [Act 592] see s 46; the Sales Tax Act 2018 [Act 806] see s 48; and the Service Tax Act 2018 [Act 807] see s 52 - -
ACT 862 Finance Act 2024 Income Tax Act 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 23 the Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 28 the Finance Act 2012 [Act 742] see s 30 and the Finance (No 2) Act 2023 [Act 851] see s 32 - -

Amending Acts

Number Title In force from Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1764 Fire Services (Amendment) Act 2025 Not Yet In Force ACT 341
ACT A1763 Supplementary Supply (2024) Act 2025 15 May 2025  
ACT A1762 Bernama (Amendment) Act 2025 Not Yet In Force ACT 780
ACT A1761 Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities (Amendment) Act 2025 Not Yet In Force ACT 613
ACT A1760 Employees Provident Fund (Amendment) Act 2025 Not Yet In Force ACT 452

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(A) 159/2025 Constitution of The High Courts (Judicial Commissioner) Order 2025 23 May 2025 12 November 2024 ACT 000
PU(A) 158/2025 Loans Guarantee (Bodies Corporate) (Remission of Tax and Stamp Duty) (Public Sector Home Financing Board) Order 2025 16 May 2025 17 May 2025 ACT 96
PU(A) 157/2025 Entertainments Duty (Exemption) (No. 15) Order 2025 15 May 2025 16 May 2025 ACT 103
PU(A) 156/2025 Entertainments Duty (Exemption) (No. 14) Order 2025 15 May 2025 16 May 2025 ACT 103
PU(A) 155/2025 Poisons (Amendment) Regulations 2025 15 May 2025 16 May 2025 LN 440/1952

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication In force from Principal/ Amending Act No
PU(B) 211/2025 Appointment of Date of Coming Into Operation 30 May 2025 1 June 2025 ACT A1592
PU(B) 210/2025 Notification of Value of Palm Kernel Under Section 12 29 May 2025 1 June 2025 to 30 June 2025 ACT 235
PU(B) 209/2025 Notice to Third Parties 28 May 2025 29 May 2025 ACT 613
PU(B) 208/2025 Notice to Third Parties 28 May 2025 29 May 2025 ACT 613
PU(B) 207/2025 Notification of Value of Crude Petroleum Oil Under Section 12 28 May 2025 30 May 2025 to 12 June 2025 ACT 235

Legislation Alert

Updated

Act/Principal No. Title Amended by In force from Section amended
AKTA 505 Akta Pentadbiran Undang-Undang Islam (Wilayah-Wilayah Persekutuan) 1993 AKTA A1592 1 Jun 2025 [PU(B) 211/2025] Seksyen 7, 97 dan 99
ACT 505 Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993 ACT A1592 1 June 2025 [PU(B) 211/2025] Sections 7, 97 and 99
ACT 371 Registration of Pharmacists Act 1951 (Revised 1989) PU(A) 116/2025 15 April 2025 First Schedule
AKTA 342 Akta Pencegahan Dan Pengawalan Penyakit Berjangkit 1988 AKTA A1742 1 Mei 2025 [PU(B) 169/2025] Seksyen 2, 10, 14A, 15A, 21A, 21B, 21C, 22A, 23, 24, 24A, 25, 26 dan 31
ACT 342 Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988 ACT A1742 1 May 2025 [PU(B) 169/2025] Sections 2, 10, 14A, 15A, 21A, 21B, 21C, 22A, 23, 24, 24A, 25, 26 and 31

Revoked

Act/Principal No. Title Revoked by In force from
PU(A) 233/2009 Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (Discipline of Students) Rules 2009 PU(A) 326/2024 1 November 2024
PU(A) 473/1999 Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Discipline of Students) Rules 1999 PU(A) 325/2024 1 November 2024
PU(A) 183/2009 Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (Discipline of Students) Rules 2009 PU(A) 323/2024 1 November 2024
PU(A) 231/2009 Universiti Malaysia Pahang (Discipline of Students) Rules 2009 PU(A) 322/2024 1 November 2024
PU(A) 181/2008 Universiti Darul Iman Malaysia (Discipline of Students) Rules 2008 PU(A) 320/2024 29 October 2024

Copyright © CLJ Legal Network Sdn Bhd To unsubscribe click here