Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #19/2019 09 May 2019

New This Week Case(s) of the Week PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA v. CHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL [2019] 4 CLJ 561 DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 705 DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 723 DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 799 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2019 Volume 4 (Part 5) CLJ 2019 Volume 4 (Part 6) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA v. CHIN CHEE KOW & ANOTHER APPEAL [2019] 4 CLJ 561
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
RICHARD MALANJUM CJ, ZAHARAH IBRAHIM CJ (MALAYA),
AZAHAR MOHAMED FCJ, BALIA YUSOF WAHI FCJ, MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ
[CIVIL APPEALS NO: 01(f)-58-10-2017(P) & 01(f)-59-11-2017(P)]
08 MARCH 2019

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Exercise of administrative powers – Discretion – Attorney General (‘AG’) – Justiciability of AG’s consent under s. 9(1) of Government Proceedings Act 1956 – Whether AG’s power to give or refuse consent amenable to judicial review – Whether AG’s discretionary power derived from statute law and subject to legal limits – Whether power of judicial review essential to constitutional role of courts – Whether unfettered discretion contradictory to rule of law – Whether AG’s power to give consent or otherwise is absolute

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Attorney General – Authority – Justiciability of AG’s consent under s. 9(1) of Government Proceedings Act 1956 – Whether AG’s power to give or refuse consent amenable to judicial review – Whether AG’s discretionary power derived from statute law and subject to legal limits – Whether power of judicial review essential to constitutional role of courts – Whether unfettered discretion contradictory to rule of law – Whether AG’s power to give consent or otherwise is absolute

---

DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 705
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
RICHARD MALANJUM CJ, ZAHARAH IBRAHIM CJ (MALAYA), DAVID WONG DAK WAH CJ (SABAH & SARAWAK), RAMLY ALI FCJ, TENGKU MAIMUN TUAN MAT FCJ, IDRUS HARUN FCJ, NALLINI PATHMANATHAN FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05(L)-76-03-2019(W)]
10 APRIL 2019

CRIMINAL LAW: Charges – Criminal charges – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 – High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order – Decision of High Court affirmed by Court of Appeal – Whether appeal ought to be allowed

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction – Pre-emptive order – Prior restraint gag order – Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal – Court of Appeal affirmed High Court’s decision in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order – Whether appeal ought to be allowed – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 13

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal – Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal – Court of Appeal affirmed High Court’s decision in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications – Applicable tests – Whether there was real and substantial risk to fairness of trial – Whether there were adequate alternative measures to remedy risk – Whether gag order necessary and proportionate step to protect applicant’s right to fair trial – Whether applicant satisfied test – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 13

---

DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 723
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF JCA, RHODZARIAH BUJANG JCA, LAU BEE LAN JCA
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: W-05-415-08-2018]
25 MARCH 2019

CRIMINAL LAW: Charges – Criminal charges – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 – Appeal against decision of High Court in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order – Whether appeal ought to be allowed

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction – Pre-emptive order – Prior restraint gag order – Appeal against decision of High Court – High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order – Whether appeal ought to be granted – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal – Appeal against decision of High Court – High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications – Whether gag order necessary – Whether there would be sub judice materials and discussions – Whether there was risk of substantial prejudice to applicant – Whether there were alternative measures to ensure applicant receives fair trial – Whether gag order could bind international media – Whether there was immediate threat of real and substantial risk of serious prejudice to administration of justice – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Contempt of court – Sub judice rule – Appeal against decision of High Court – High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysia that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether sub judice rule has application in Malaysia since there is no jury in criminal trials – Whether there was possibility of prejudice from unwarranted publications in cases of non-jury trials

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties – Freedom of speech and expression – Freedom of press – Appeal against decision of High Court – High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether gag order proportionate when weighed against applicant’s interest, media’s freedom of speech and expression and open justice system – Federal Constitution, art. 10

---

DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB HJ ABDUL RAZAK v. PP [2019] 4 CLJ 799
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
MOHD NAZLAN GHAZALI J
[CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO: WA-44-115-07-2018]
08 OCTOBER 2018

CRIMINAL LAW: Charges – Criminal charges – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 – Application for prior restraint gag order – Whether application ought to be allowed

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Jurisdiction – Pre-emptive order – Application for prior restraint gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order – Whether gag order ought to be granted – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Proceedings – Application for gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications – Whether gag order necessary – Whether there would be sub judice materials and discussions – Whether there was risk of substantial prejudice to applicant – Whether there were alternative measures to ensure applicant receives fair trial – Whether gag order could bind international media – Whether there was immediate threat of real and substantial risk of serious prejudice to administration of justice – Federal Constitution, art. 126 – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Contempt of court – Sub judice rule – Application for gag order – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysia that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order – Whether sub judice rule has application in Malaysia since there is no jury in criminal trials – Whether there was possibility of prejudice from unwarranted publications in case of non-jury trials

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties – Freedom of speech and expression – Freedom of press – Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges – Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage – Applicant sought gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial – Whether gag order proportionate when weighed against applicant’s interest, media’s freedom of speech and expression and open justice system – Federal Constitution, art. 10

---

1. Lim Poh Kwee v. Lim Choon Seng [2018] 1 LNS 1671 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Lim Choon Seng v. Lim Poh Kwee [Civil No: J-02(NCVC(W)-869-05/2017]

2. Yip Kum Keong v. PP [2019] 1 LNS 86 (CA) membenarkan sebahagian kes Mahkamah Tinggi PP v. Yip Kum Keong [Perbicaraan Jenayah No: 45A-13-05/2015]

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 268	KHOO SAY LOCK v. PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR & ORS CIVIL PROCEDURE: Discovery - Documents - Relevancy - Documents concerning land acquisition process - Documents relating to manner in which purported acquisition was carried out - Action commenced on property upon formal possession by state authority and upon endorsement of notice of formal possession - Whether there was any reasonable explanation or sufficient facts to disclose relevancy of documents to plaintiff's case For the plaintiff - Satish Nair; M/s Satish Alli & Associates For the defendant 1 & 2 - Nurul Husna Lucyia Gelanggang; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang, Negeri Selangor For the defendant 6 - KY Choo; M/s Kee Sern, Siu & Huey For the defendant 9 - Tai Yong Fung; M/s Shook Lin & Bok
[2018] 1 LNS 609	WASILAH ENGINEERING SDN BHD v. KOLEJ UNIVERSITI INSANIAH SDN BHD & ORS CONTRACT: Liability - Liability of first defendant - Letter of award issued by second defendant to plaintiff - Plaintiff sued first defendant - First defendant was holding company to second defendant - Whether first defendant liable for second defendant's debt - Whether existed valid contract between plaintiff and first defendant CONTRACT: Privity - Memorandum of undertaking between first and second defendants - First defendant undertook to pay financial obligations of second defendant - Whether plaintiff can sue on Memorandum of undertaking - Whether plaintiff barred by doctrine of privity of contract EVIDENCE: Admission - Admission of indebtedness - Admission of indebtedness made by first defendant during mediation meeting - Whether admission clear and unequivocal - Whether minutes of meeting approved - Whether admission admissible For the plaintiff - Sharifah Fazidah Syed Hashim; M/s Sharifah Idah & Co For the defendants - Siti Rafidah Abdul Raof; M/s Aswandi Hashim & Co
[2018] 1 LNS 240	PP v. ESWADI ABDUL RAHIM CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Corruption charges - Delay in charging accused - Whether prejudice caused to accused - Whether delay had in any way affected testimony of witnesses EVIDENCE: Documentary evidence - Secondary evidence - Original copy of fax transmissions were not produced - Reliance on thermal copies - Whether thermal copies were produced contemporaneously when actual documents were faxed at other end of line - Whether accuracy of thermal copies has reached a high degree of reliability and accuracy - Whether contents of document were admissible - Evidence Act 1950, s. 65(1) CRIMINAL LAW: Corruption - Corruptly receiving gratification - Demand made by accused that his father be made a director of company in return for his assistance in obtaining permits for company - Whether request of accused that his father be made a director of company amounts to gratification - Whether directorship in company would fall within meaning of obtaining any 'office' or 'dignity' in paragraph (b) of definition of "gratification" in s. 2 of Anti-Corruption Act 1997 - Whether presumption of gratification applicable For the appellant - Muhammad Shafee Abdullah & Wan Aizuddin Wan Mohammed; M/s Shafee & Co For the prosecution - Nurul Wahida Jalaluddin, Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; SPRM Negeri Perak
[2018] 1 LNS 319	ZULKARNAIN HARUN lwn. PP UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kanun Keseksaan - Seksyen 376(2) - Pertuduhan rogol statutori - Mangsa berumur 19 tahun ketika memberikan keterangan - Bayi yang dilahirkan dan laporan analisa DNA mengesahkan tertuduh adalah bapa kandung bayi yang dilahirkan oleh mangsa - Mangsa dapat mengingati fakta kes yang material dengan terang dan jelas - Sama ada kes-kes seksual memerlukan keterangan sokongan - Sama ada keterangan mangsa merupakan keterangan substantif - Sama ada keterangan pakar DNA perlu diterima 'on its face value' PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Penafian - Pertuduhan rogol - Tertuduh mendakwa zakarnya tidak berfungsi - Mangsa telah mengandungkan dan melahirkan anak hasil zuriat tertuduh - Laporan DNA mengesahkan tertuduh adalah bapa kandung bayi yang dilahirkan mangsa - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh bersifat penafian semata-mata PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Kesalahan seksual - Rogol statutori - Tertuduh diperintahkan membayar pampasan kepada mangsa disamping hukuman penjara 20 tahun dan 10 sebatan - Mangsa terpaksa berhenti sekolah dan mencari nafkah sendiri untuk membesarkan anak - Sama ada kekerapan kesalahan rogol dan trauma yang terpaksa dilalui oleh mangsa perlu diambil kira - Sama ada mangsa wajar diberi pampasan Bagi pihak perayu/tertuduh - Hadir Sendiri Bagi pihak responden/TPR - Siti Hajar Mustafa
[2018] 1 LNS 152	RISWANSAPUTRA MOHD YUNUS & YANG LAIN lwn. PP PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Notis Rayuan - Lanjutan masa - Budibicara mahkamah - Pemfailan notis rayuan di luar had masa - Notis rayuan difailkan lebih kurang 6 bulan dari tarikh hukuman dijatuhkan - Sama ada sebab-sebab kelewatan adalah munasabah - Sama ada alasan bahawa tertuduh telah insaf dan memohon agar hukuman diringankan merupakan alasan kelewatan yang munasabah - Sama ada hukuman yang telah dijatuhkan adalah dalam ruang lingkup yang dibenarkan oleh undang-undang - Sama ada terdapat kelewatan yang melampau Bagi pihak pemohon-pemohon - Hadir Sendiri Bagi pihak responden - Siti Hajar Mustaffa, Timbalan Pendakwaraya

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 4 (Part 5)

FEDERAL COURT

Peguam Negara Malaysia v. Chin Chee Kow & Another Appeal
Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), Azahar Mohamed, Balia Yusof Wahi, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ
(Administrative Law; Constitutional Law - Attorney General - Justiciability of consent - Whether power to give consent or otherwise absolute) [2019] 4 CLJ 561 [FC]

• (Civil Appeal No: 01(f)-58-10-2017(P))
• For the appellant - Shamsol Bolhassan & Rosli Ahmad; SFC
• For the respondent - Ravi Chandran; M/s SC Ravi & Assocs
• (Civil Appeal No: 01(f)-59-11-2017(P))
• For the appellants - Karin Lim Ai Ching & A Suppiah; M/s Juli & Ameleena
• For the 1st respondent - Shamsol Bolhassan & Rosli Ahmad; SFC
• For the 2nd respondent - Ravin Vello; M/s Vello & Assocs
• For the 3rd respondent - Balwant Singh & T Gunaseelan; M/s Balwant Singh & Co 

SK M&E Bersekutu Sdn Bhd v. Pembinaan Legenda Unggul Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
Richard Malanjum CJ, Ahmad Maarop PCA, Azahar Mohamed, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ
(Contract; Trusts - Building contracts - Subcontract - Retention sum - Whether held on trust) [2019] 4 CLJ 590 [FC]

• For the appellant - Lim Wai Loon, Rohan Arasoo & Teoh Yen Yee; M/s Harold & Lam Partnership
• For the respondent - Chong Hooi Yin & Muhammad Iqram Zulkupri; M/s Azman Davidson & Co 

COURT OF APPEAL

CB Media Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Kesas Sdn Bhd
Abdul Rahman Sebli, Suraya Othman, Stephen Chung JJCA
(Tort - Trespass - Structures - Advertising billboard - Whether encroached and trespassed onto land reserve - Damages) [2019] 4 CLJ 609 [CA]

• For the appellants - Rishwant Singh & Noor Muzalifah Shabudin; M/s Cecil Abraham & Partners
• For the respondent - HY Lee, Wong Huei Chin & Angus Tiong; M/s Tiong & Woon 

Ong Koh Hou v. DA Land Sdn Bhd & Ors
Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA
(Civil Procedure - Stay of proceedings - Whether application bona fide) [2019] 4 CLJ 622 [CA]

• For the appellant - Gopal Sri Ram, Elyazura Md Shaarani, David Yii & Damien Chan; M/s Soo Thien Ming & Nashrah
• For the respondents - Preetha Pillai; M/s Skrine 

Rosliza Ibrahim v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor
Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Suraya Othman JJCA
(Constitutional Law; Islamic Law; Interpretation - Jurisdiction - Syariah Court - Whether applicant born to Muslim parents - Whether constitutional matter - 'Parents' - Para. (b) of interpretation of 'Muslim' in s. 2 of Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003) [2019] 4 CLJ 640 [CA]

• For the appellant - Aston Paiva & Michael Cheah Ern Tien; M/s Amerbon
• For the 1st respondent - Nik Suhaimi Nik Sulaiman, Mohd Syahrizal Syah Zakaria & Muhammad Haziq Hashim; State Legal Advisor, Selangor
• For the 2nd respondent - Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, Abdul Rahim Sinwan, Muhammad Zaki Sukery, Muhammad Akmal Abu Bakar & Muhamad Hisham Marzuki; M/s Zainul Rijal Talha & Amir
• Watching brief:
     1. Raja Noor Syuhada Raja Khairuddin; M/s Tan Law Practice (representing all under No. 1)
          - Women's Aid Organisation
          - All Women's Aid Action Society Malaysia
          - Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (Empower)
          - Sisters In Islam (SIS)
          - Association of Women Lawyers (AWL)
          - Perak Women for Women (PWW)
          - Women's Centre for Change Penang (WCC)
          - Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
         Sabah Women's Action - Resource Group (SAWO)
         Tenaganita
     2. Philip TN Koh (M/s Mah Kamariyah & Philip Koh)
          - Majlis Perundangan Malaysia Agama Buddha, Kristian, Hindu, Sikh dan Tao
     3. Mansur Saad (Suhakam) 

Mohamad Roslan Marjo v. PP & Other Applications
Azhahari Kamal Ramli J
(Criminal Law; Jurisdiction - Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 - Section 26E - Whether security offence - Whether charges ought to be tried in Sessions Court) [2019] 4 CLJ 648 [HC]

• For the applicant - Shankar Ram Pohumall Asnani & Daniel Ling; M/s Thomas, Shankar Ram & Co Advocs
• For the respondent - Nurul Asyikin Rosli & Fazri Sani Mohamed Fadzril; DPP 

HIGH COURT

PP lwn. Khiew Bu Poh
Azizul Azmi Adnan H
(Undang-undang Jenayah - Membunuh - Sama ada pembunuhan dibuktikan - Pembelaan - Automatisme - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh berjaya membangkitkan keraguan munasabah atas kes pendakwaan) [2019] 4 CLJ 660 [HC]

• Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Azeezi Nordin & Ahmad Nazneen Zulkifli; TPR
• Bagi pihak tertuduh - Kitson Foong & Chew Jee San; T/n Kit & Assocs
• Bagi pihak pemerhati - Jagjit Singh Bant Singh 

Rezza Radzi lwn. Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
Abu Bakar Katar PK
(Penahanan Pencegahan; Undang-undang Pentadbiran - Perintah tahanan - Sama ada mematuhi peruntukan ss. 4(1) dan 4(5) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 - Semakan kehakiman) [2019] 4 CLJ 690 [HC]

• Bagi pihak pemohon - Abdul Muhaimin Mustafa; T/n Maniam Nair & Co
• Bagi pihak responden - Siti Hajar; Peguam Kanan Persekutuan 

SUBJECT INDEX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Exercise of administrative powers - Discretion - Attorney General ('AG') - Justiciability of AG's consent under s. 9(1) of Government Proceedings Act 1956 - Whether AG's power to give or refuse consent amenable to judicial review - Whether AG's discretionary power derived from statute law and subject to legal limits - Whether power of judicial review essential to constitutional role of courts - Whether unfettered discretion contradictory to rule of law - Whether AG's power to give consent or otherwise is absolute
Peguam Negara Malaysia v. Chin Chee Kow & Another Appeal
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), Azahar Mohamed, Balia Yusof Wahi, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 561 [FC]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Stay of proceedings - Application for - Dispute on land matter - Application to stay decision of High Court - Whether application bona fide - Whether applicant must show special circumstances - Whether court has absolute discretion in granting stay - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 44 & 73
Ong Koh Hou v. DA Land Sdn Bhd & Ors
(Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 622 [CA]

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Attorney General - Authority - Justiciability of AG's consent under s. 9(1) of Government Proceedings Act 1956 - Whether AG's power to give or refuse consent amenable to judicial review - Whether AG's discretionary power derived from statute law and subject to legal limits - Whether power of judicial review essential to constitutional role of courts - Whether unfettered discretion contradictory to rule of law - Whether AG's power to give consent or otherwise is absolute
Peguam Negara Malaysia v. Chin Chee Kow & Another Appeal
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), Azahar Mohamed, Balia Yusof Wahi, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 561 [FC]

Jurisdiction - Syariah Court - Applicant alleged that she was not professing religion of Islam - Whether applicant born to Muslim parents - Whether applicant legitimate person - Whether Syariah Court has jurisdiction over applicant - Whether Syariah Court has jurisdiction to decide whether applicant was no longer Muslim - Whether constitutional matter - Federal Constitution, art. 121(1A)
Rosliza Ibrahim v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor
(Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Suraya Othman JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 640 [CA]

CONTRACT

Building contracts - Subcontract - Retention sum - Subcontract provided that some monies retained as retention sums to be released in two tranches - Contractors failed to release monies to subcontractors - Whether retention sums held on trust by contractor - Whether there was express clause providing for creation of trust over retention monies - Whether trust could still arise due to provision for release of retention monies upon any rectification work and since no notice of rectification was received from contractor - Whether it was implied by law retention sum was to be held in trust - Whether trust of retention sum could be constituted without appropriating and setting aside monies as separate trust fund
SK M&E Bersekutu Sdn Bhd v. Pembinaan Legenda Unggul Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Ahmad Maarop PCA, Azahar Mohamed, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 590 [FC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 - Section 26E - Whether security offence - Whether charges fell within ambit of preamble (1), (2), (3) and (4) of Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 ('SOSMA') - Exclusion of paras (c) and (d) of art. 149(1)(e) of Federal Constitution in preamble to SOSMA - Whether offence not intended to be categorised as security offence - Whether charges fell within scope of art. 149(1)(e) of Federal Constitution - Whether charges void and/or unconstitutional - Whether charges ought to be tried in Sessions Court - Whether accused ought to be released on bail
Mohamad Roslan Marjo v. PP & Other Applications
(Azhahari Kamal Ramli J) [2019] 4 CLJ 648 [HC]

INTERPRETATION

'parents' - 'parents' in para. (b) of interpretation of 'Muslim' in s. 2 of Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 - Whether includes putative father of illegitimate child
Rosliza Ibrahim v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor
(Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Suraya Othman JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 640 [CA]

ISLAMIC LAW

Syariah Court - Jurisdiction - Applicant alleged that she was not professing religion of Islam - Whether applicant born to Muslim parents - Whether applicant legitimate person - Whether Syariah Court has jurisdiction over applicant - Whether Syariah Court has jurisdiction to decide whether applicant was no longer Muslim - Whether constitutional matter - Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003, ss. 2 & 61(3)(b)(x)
Rosliza Ibrahim v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor
(Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat, Suraya Othman JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 640 [CA]

JURISDICTION

Courts - High Court - Charge under s. 26E of Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 ('ATIPSOM') - Whether security offence - Whether charges fell within ambit of preamble (1), (2), (3) and (4) of Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 ('SOSMA') - Exclusion of paras. (c) and (d) of art. 149(1)(e) of Federal Constitution in preamble to SOSMA - Whether offence not intended to be categorised as security offence - Whether charges fell within scope of art. 149(1)(e) of Federal Constitution - Whether charges void and/or unconstitutional - Whether charges ought to be tried in Sessions Court
Mohamad Roslan Marjo v. PP & Other Applications
(Azhahari Kamal Ramli J) [2019] 4 CLJ 648 [HC]

TORT

Damages - Claim for - Trespassing - Unipole advertising structure encroached and trespassed onto land reserve of respondent - Issue of quantum - Respondent filed counterclaim against appellants for losses and damages suffered - Whether respondent produced strong and cogent evidence to establish counterclaim against appellants - Whether orders on special and general damages ought to be set aside - Whether nominal sum of RM50,000 as damages for trespass fair and adequate
CB Media Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Kesas Sdn Bhd
(Abdul Rahman Sebli, Suraya Othman, Stephen Chung JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 609 [CA]

Trespass - Structures - Advertising billboard - Erection of - First appellant obtained approval to erect advertising billboard at federal road reserve - Whether respondent wrongfully and without permission took down billboard at location - Appellants sued respondent for losses - Whether unipole advertising structure erected at correct location - Whether appellants carried out survey to verify exact location - Whether unipole advertising structure encroached and trespassed onto land reserve of respondent - Liability of appellants - Whether proved
CB Media Sdn Bhd & Anor v. Kesas Sdn Bhd
(Abdul Rahman Sebli, Suraya Othman, Stephen Chung JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 609 [CA]

TRUSTS

Creation of trusts - Building contract - Subcontract - Retention sum - Subcontract provided that some monies retained as retention sums to be released in two tranches - Contractors failed to release monies to subcontractors - Whether retention sums held on trust by contractor - Whether there was express clause providing for creation of trust over retention monies - Whether trust could still arise due to provision for release of retention monies upon any rectification work and since no notice of rectification was received from contractor - Whether it was implied by law retention sum was to be held in trust - Whether trust of retention sum could be constituted without appropriating and setting aside monies as separate trust fund
SK M&E Bersekutu Sdn Bhd v. Pembinaan Legenda Unggul Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Ahmad Maarop PCA, Azahar Mohamed, Rohana Yusuf, Mohd Zawawi Salleh FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 590 [FC]

INDEKS PERKARA

PENAHANAN PENCEGAHAN

Perintah tahanan - Permohonan - Semakan kehakiman keputusan Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri (TMDN) mengeluarkan perintah tahanan - Pemohon bergantung pada percakapan pemohon ('eksh. RZ-7') - Sama ada setiap helaian percakapan pemohon mempunyai tandatangan atau cap cari pemohon - Kegagalan melampirkan salinan rakaman percakapan pemohon yang dikatakan diambil secara tulisan tangan - Sama ada menjejaskan kewujudan eksh. RZ-7 yang menjadi asas pertimbangan TMDN sebelum membuat perintah tahanan - Sama ada terdapat kegagalan mematuhi peruntukan ss. 4(1) dan 4(5) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 - Sama ada terdapat pelanggaran mandatori - Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985, ss. 3, 6(1), 7(1)
Rezza Radzi lwn. Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
(Abu Bakar Katar PK) [2019] 4 CLJ 690 [HC]

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH

Kesalahan - Membunuh - Pelakuan kesalahan dirakam dalam rakaman litar tertutup - Sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan elemen-elemen pembunuhan - Sama ada berlaku kematian seseorang - Sama ada kematian disebabkan atau berakibat daripada perbuatan tertuduh - Sama ada perbuatan membunuh dilakukan dengan niat - Sama ada pihak pendakwaan berjaya membuktikan kes prima facie - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh berjaya membangkitkan keraguan munasabah atas kes pendakwaan - Kanun Keseksaan, ss. 300 & 302
PP lwn. Khiew Bu Poh
(Azizul Azmi Adnan H) [2019] 4 CLJ 660 [HC]

Pembelaan - Automatisme - Tertuduh dituduh melakukan pembunuhan - Pelakuan membunuh dirakam dalam rakaman litar tertutup - Pembelaan bahawa tertuduh dalam keadaan automatisme kerana bawah pengaruh dadah - Sama ada gerak-geri dan tindakan tertuduh dalam rakaman litar tertutup selaras dengan pembelaan bahawa dia tidak sedar apa-apa yang dilakukan - Sama ada pembelaan tertuduh berjaya membangkitkan keraguan munasabah atas kes pendakwaan - Kanun Keseksaan, ss. 300 & 302
PP lwn. Khiew Bu Poh
(Azizul Azmi Adnan H) [2019] 4 CLJ 660 [HC]

UNDANG-UNDANG PENTADBIRAN

Semakan kehakiman - Permohonan - Semakan kehakiman keputusan Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri (TMDN) mengeluarkan perintah tahanan - Pemohon bergantung pada percakapan pemohon ('eksh. RZ-7') - Sama ada setiap helaian percakapan pemohon mempunyai tandatangan atau cap cari pemohon - Kegagalan melampirkan salinan rakaman percakapan pemohon yang dikatakan diambil secara tulisan tangan - Sama ada menjejaskan kewujudan eksh. RZ-7 yang menjadi asas pertimbangan TMDN sebelum membuat perintah tahanan - Sama ada terdapat kegagalan mematuhi peruntukan ss. 4(1) dan 4(5) Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 - Sama ada terdapat pelanggaran mandatori - Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-Langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985, ss. 3, 6(1), 7(1)
Rezza Radzi lwn. Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Yang Lain
(Abu Bakar Katar PK) [2019] 4 CLJ 690 [HC]

---

CLJ 2019 Volume 4 (Part 6)

FEDERAL COURT

Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Idrus Harun, Nallini Pathmanathan FCJJ
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Former Prime Minister of Malaysia charged with criminal charges - Application for pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order) [2019] 4 CLJ 705 [FC]

• For the appellant - Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Harvinderjit Singh, Farhan Read, Al-Firdaus Shahrul, Wan Aizuddin Wan Mohammed, Rahmat Hazlan, Muhammad Farhan Shafee, Syahirah Hanapiah, Zahria Ellena Redza; M/s Shafee & Co
• For the respondent - Tommy Thomas, Sithambaram Vairavan, Hj Sulaiman Abdullah, Manoj Kurup, Donald Joseph Franklin, Budiman Lutfi Mohamed & Izzat Fauzan; DPPs 

COURT OF APPEAL

Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Former Prime Minister of Malaysia charged with criminal charges - Application for pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether Malaysian law authorises granting of gag order in nature of pre-emptive order) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

• For the appellant - Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Harvinder Jit Singh, Sarah Maalini Abishegam, Farhan Read, Alfirdaus Shahrul Naing, Wan Aizuddin Wan Mohammed, Rahmat Hazlan, Muhammad Farhan Shafee, Wee Yeong Kang, Syahirah Hanapiah & Zahria Eleena Redza; M/s Shafee & Co
• For the respondent - Tommy Thomas, V Sithambaram, Hj Sulaiman Abdullah, Manoj Kurup, Donald Joseph Franklin & Izzat Fauzan; DPPs 

HIGH COURT

Mohd Affandi Yusoff v. Hong Leong Bank Bhd & Anor
David Wong Dak Wah, Abang Iskandar, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JJCA
(Land Law - Title - Indefeasibility of title - Whether title transferred using fraudulent instrument) [2019] 4 CLJ 755 [HC]

• For the appellant - S Shanmugan & R Rajasegran; M/s Sutha & Co
• For the 1st respondent - Daphne Khoo Su Mei & Tan Mei Fang; M/s Rahmat Lim & Partners
• For the 2nd respondent - Yap Siew Yee & Tee Chin Hian; M/s Yap Siew Yee & Co 

PP lwn. Rosman Saprey & Satu Lagi Rayuan
Mohtarudin Baki, Yaacob Md Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR
(Undang-undang Jenayah; Prosedur Sivil - Kesalahan berkaitan dadah - Tatacara pengambilan contoh air kencing) [2019] 4 CLJ 767 [HC]

• (Rayuan Jenayah No: A-06B-23-06-2017)
• Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, Nurul Huda Noraini Mohamed Noor, Mangaiarkarasi Krishnan & Hamdan Hamzah; TPR
• Bagi pihak responden - Charan Singh Kartar Singh & Jagdave Singh Kuldeep Singh; T/n Nurul & Charan
• (Rayuan Jenayah No: W-09-195-06-2017)
• Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, Nurul Huda Noraini Mohamed Noor, Mangaiarkarasi Krishnan & Hamdan Hamzah; TPR
• Bagi pihak responden - Richard Bong; T/n Bong & Co 

Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure; Constitutional Law - Former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant for pre-emptive gag order) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

• For the applicant - Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Harvinderjit Singh, R Krishnan, C Vignesh Kumar, Farhan Read, Hamidi Mohd Noh, Wan Aizuddin Wan Mohammed, Rahmat Hazlan & Muhammad Farhan Shafee; M/s Shafee & Co
• For the respondent - Mohamad Hanafiah Zakaria, Manoj Kurup, Suhaimi Ibrahim, Umar Saifuddin Jaafar, Ishak Mohd Yusoff, Donald Joseph Franklin, Muhammad Saifuddin Hashim Musaimi, Budiman Lutfi Mohamed, Sulaiman Kho Kheng Fuei, Mohd Ashrof Adrin Kamarul & Muhammad Izzat Fauzan; DPPs
• Watching brief for Rosmah Mansor - K Kumaraendran, Geethan Ram Vincent & Revin Kumar 

Mohamad Sani Sharif & Satu Lagi lwn. Muhammad Danial Aiman Che Omar (Seorang Budak Yang Mendakwa Melalui Ibu Dan Wakil Litigasinya)
Asmadi Hussin PK
(Ganti Rugi - Kecederaan diri - Kehilangan keupayaan mencari pendapatan) [2019] 4 CLJ 831 [HC]

• Bagi pihak perayu-perayu/defendan-defendan - Subashini Gunasegran & Baljeet Kaur Harbhajan Singh; T/n VT Singam, D Gunasegaran & Co
• Bagi pihak responden/plaintif - Ooi Kim Ing; T/n Manjit & Co 

Wolfgang Leonhard Schulz & Ors v. Sapura-Schulz Hydroforming Sdn Bhd & Anor
Wong Chee Lin JC
(Arbitration - Award - Application to set aside registration of final award handed down by arbitral tribunal) [2019] 4 CLJ 853 [HC]

• For the applicants - Puteri Shehnaz Majid & Aizurra Mirsya Aminudin; M/s Cheah Teh & Su
• For the respondents - Kuhendran Thanapalasingam, Farah Shuhadah Razali & Ryan Wong; M/s Zul Rafique & Partners 

SUBJECT INDEX

ARBITRATION

Award - Registration - Application to set aside registration of final award handed down by arbitral tribunal - Respondents failed, refused and/or neglected to comply with final award and have not paid damages ordered in final award - Whether final award could be registered as judgment prior to taxation of costs - Whether possible to take out and maintain action to recover costs where such costs had yet to be determined - Arbitration Act 2005, s. 39(1)
Wolfgang Leonhard Schulz & Ors v. Sapura-Schulz Hydroforming Sdn Bhd & Anor
(Wong Chee Lin JC) [2019] 4 CLJ 853 [HC]

CRIMINAL LAW

Charges - Criminal charges - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Appeal against decision of High Court in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order - Whether appeal ought to be allowed
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

Charges - Criminal charges - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Application for prior restraint gag order - Whether application ought to be allowed
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

Charges - Criminal charges - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges relating to offences under Penal Code, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order - Decision of High Court affirmed by Court of Appeal - Whether appeal ought to be allowed
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Idrus Harun, Nallini Pathmanathan FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 705 [FC]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal - Court of Appeal affirmed High Court's decision in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications - Applicable tests - Whether there was real and substantial risk to fairness of trial - Whether there were adequate alternative measures to remedy risk - Whether gag order necessary and proportionate step to protect applicant's right to fair trial - Whether applicant satisfied test - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 13
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Idrus Harun, Nallini Pathmanathan FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 705 [FC]

Appeal - Appeal against decision of High Court - High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications - Whether gag order necessary - Whether there would be sub judice materials and discussions - Whether there was risk of substantial prejudice to applicant - Whether there were alternative measures to ensure applicant receives fair trial - Whether gag order could bind international media - Whether there was immediate threat of real and substantial risk of serious prejudice to administration of justice - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

Contempt of court - Sub judice rule - Appeal against decision of High Court - High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysia that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether sub judice rule has application in Malaysia since there is no jury in criminal trials - Whether there was possibility of prejudice from unwarranted publications in cases of non-jury trials
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

Contempt of court - Sub judice rule - Application for gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysia that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether sub judice rule has application in Malaysia since there is no jury in criminal trials - Whether there was possibility of prejudice from unwarranted publications in case of non-jury trials
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

Jurisdiction - Pre-emptive order - Application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order - Whether gag order ought to be granted - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

Jurisdiction - Pre-emptive order - Prior restraint gag order - Appeal against decision of Court of Appeal - Court of Appeal affirmed High Court's decision in dismissing application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order - Whether appeal ought to be allowed - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s. 13
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Richard Malanjum CJ, Zaharah Ibrahim CJ (Malaya), David Wong Dak Wah CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Ramly Ali, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Idrus Harun, Nallini Pathmanathan FCJJ) [2019] 4 CLJ 705 [FC]

Jurisdiction - Pre-emptive order - Prior restraint gag order - Appeal against decision of High Court - High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order - Whether appeal ought to be granted - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

Proceedings - Application for gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought prior restraint or pre-emptive gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether there are specific provisions in Malaysian law that authorise granting of gag order in nature of prior restraint or pre-emptive order - Whether Malaysian courts have jurisdiction to grant prior restraint or pre-emptive order against discussions or publications - Whether gag order necessary - Whether there would be sub judice materials and discussions - Whether there was risk of substantial prejudice to applicant - Whether there were alternative measures to ensure applicant receives fair trial - Whether gag order could bind international media - Whether there was immediate threat of real and substantial risk of serious prejudice to administration of justice - Federal Constitution, art. 126 - Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss. 13 & 15
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Fundamental liberties - Freedom of speech and expression - Freedom of press - Appeal against decision of High Court - High Court dismissed application for prior restraint gag order - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether gag order proportionate when weighed against applicant's interest, media's freedom of speech and expression and open justice system - Federal Constitution, art. 10
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Zabariah Mohd Yusof, Rhodzariah Bujang, Lau Bee Lan JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 723 [CA]

Fundamental liberties - Freedom of speech and expression - Freedom of press - Applicant, former Prime Minister of Malaysia, charged with seven criminal charges - Criminal charges gained national and international attention and media coverage - Applicant sought gag order to prevent media and public from discussing merits of criminal charges until conclusion of trial - Whether gag order proportionate when weighed against applicant's interest, media's freedom of speech and expression and open justice system - Federal Constitution, art. 10
Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Hj Abdul Razak v. PP
(Mohd Nazlan Ghazali J) [2019] 4 CLJ 799 [HC]

LAND LAW

Title - Indefeasibility of title - Land auctioned and sold to successful bidder/purchaser - Term of condition of sale stipulated balance purchase price must be paid within 120 days of sale - Purchaser paid balance purchase price within stipulated time - High Court acknowledged receipt but issued receipts dated after 120 days limit - Whether purchaser breached term of condition of sale - Whether purchaser made full payment within specified time - Whether purchaser beneficial owner of land - Whether sale of land completed
Mohd Affandi Yusoff v. Hong Leong Bank Bhd & Anor
(David Wong Dak Wah, Abang Iskandar, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 755 [HC]

Title - Transfer - Allegation of fraudulent transfer - Land auctioned and sold to successful bidder/purchaser - Discovery of amendment and/or alteration of date in instrument to transfer land - Whether affected obligation and/or liability of purchaser in proclamation for sale - Whether title transferred using fraudulent instrument - Whether presentation of instrument of transfer valid - Whether purchaser title defeasible - National Land Code, s. 340(2)(b)
Mohd Affandi Yusoff v. Hong Leong Bank Bhd & Anor
(David Wong Dak Wah, Abang Iskandar, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim JJCA) [2019] 4 CLJ 755 [HC]

INDEKS PERKARA

GANTI RUGI

Kecederaan diri - Kehilangan keupayaan mencari pendapatan - Pra-syarat - Sama ada plaintif mesti mempunyai pendapatan atau terjamin akan mendapat pendapatan sebelum kemalangan - Plaintif seorang pelajar dan tidak bekerja semasa kemalangan - Sama ada penolakan tuntutan kehilangan keupayaan mencari pendapatan selaras dengan undang-undang - Akta Undang-undang Sivil 1956, s. 28A(2)(c)(i)
Mohamad Sani Sharif & Satu Lagi lwn. Muhammad Danial Aiman Che Omar (Seorang Budak Yang Mendakwa Melalui Ibu Dan Wakil Litigasinya)
(Asmadi Hussin PK) [2019] 4 CLJ 831 [HC]

Kecederaan diri - Kuantum - Rayuan terhadap kuantum - Kecederaan kepatahan tulang humerus, clavicle dan scapula - Sama ada kesan sampingan akibat kecederaan-kecederaan sepatutnya ditaksir bersama-sama kelumpuhan keseluruhan tangan kiri - Sama ada jumlah RM90,000 munasabah
Mohamad Sani Sharif & Satu Lagi lwn. Muhammad Danial Aiman Che Omar (Seorang Budak Yang Mendakwa Melalui Ibu Dan Wakil Litigasinya)
(Asmadi Hussin PK) [2019] 4 CLJ 831 [HC]

PROSEDUR SIVIL

Rayuan - Rayuan oleh pihak pendakwaan - Rayuan terhadap pelepasan dan pembebasan - Tertuduh-tertuduh dituduh mentadbir diri dengan memasukkan dadah dalam badan - Tertuduh-tertuduh didapati bersalah dan disabitkan atas kesalahan di Mahkamah Majistret - Mahkamah Tinggi membenarkan rayuan tertuduh-tertuduh atas alasan kegagalan pihak polis mematuhi tatacara pengambilan contoh air kencing bawah Perintah Tetap Ketua Polis Negara F103 ('PTKPN F103') dan Garis Panduan Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia Bil. 6/2002 ('GPKKM 6/2002') - Sama ada PTKPN dan GPKKM mempunyai kuat kuasa undang-undang dan wajib dipatuhi - Sama ada kegagalan mematuhi tatacara menjejaskan kes pendakwaan
PP lwn. Rosman Saprey & Satu Lagi Rayuan
(Mohtarudin Baki, Yaacob Md Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR) [2019] 4 CLJ 767 [HC]

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH

Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 15(1)(a) - Kesalahan berkaitan dadah - Mentadbir diri dengan memasukkan dadah dalam badan - Tatacara pengambilan contoh air kencing - Tertuduh-tertuduh masing-masing diberi satu botol oleh pihak polis untuk pengambilan contoh air kencing - Ujian saringan menunjukkan tertuduh-tertuduh positif dadah - Pihak polis menuruti tatacara pengambilan air kencing dalam Perintah Tetap Ketua Polis Negara F103 ('PTKPN F103') dan Garis Panduan Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia Bil. 6/2002 ('GPKKM 6/2002') - Sama ada PTKPN F103 dan GPKKM 6/2002 mempunyai kuat kuasa undang-undang dan wajib dipatuhi - Sama ada pertuduhan terhadap tertuduh-tertuduh berjaya dibuktikan - Sama ada mahkamah terikat dengan keputusan dalam Noor Shariful Rizal Noor Zawawi v. PP - Akta Dadah Berbahaya, ss. 31A(1A), 38B, 44 & 47 - Akta Penagih Dadah (Rawatan dan Pemulihan) 1983, s. 28
PP lwn. Rosman Saprey & Satu Lagi Rayuan
(Mohtarudin Baki, Yaacob Md Sam, Ab Karim Ab Jalil HHMR) [2019] 4 CLJ 767 [HC]

---

LNS Article(s)

1. CROSS-BORDER SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS: LEGAL ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ^{[Read excerpt]}
   UMMA DEVI LOGANATHAN* [2019] 1 LNS(A) lviii

[2019] 1 LNS(A) lviii

MALAYSIA

---

CROSS-BORDER SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS: LEGAL ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

UMMA DEVI LOGANATHAN*

1.0 Introduction

Globalization and the tremendous rate of development in the international financial markets in recent years has seen the enormous expansion in cross-border securities transactions. Due to advancements in technology, financial markets now have virtually uninhibited access to customers independent of their geographical location. Similarly investors now can invest in any international market through remotely located financial intermediaries with consummate ease. The proliferation of cross-border trading has given rise to newer challenges for regulatory oversight. Emerging markets are especially prone to the effects of cross-border trading. Therefore, it is necessary that emerging market regulators must be in a position to assess the nature of cross-border transactions and should be equipped to take action against any possible misconduct.

. . .

* Magistrate, LLB (Hons) Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Masters in Public Administration (MPA) Universiti Sains Malaysia, LLM (Corporate) Universiti Utara Malaysia. Currently, pursuing PhD in criminology at Universiti Sains Malaysia.

2. PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BHD v. HAMEED JAGUBAR - DID THE FEDERAL COURT FINALLY ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS ON BACKDATED INSURANCE COVER NOTES?+ ^{[Read excerpt]}
   MANOHARAN VEERASAMY* [2019] 1 LNS(A) lx

[2019] 1 LNS(A) lx

MALAYSIA

---

PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BHD v. HAMEED JAGUBAR -
DID THE FEDERAL COURT FINALLY ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS ON BACKDATED INSURANCE COVER NOTES?+

MANOHARAN VEERASAMY*

The recent Federal Court decision in the case of Pacific & Orient Co Bhd v. Hameed Jagubar Syed Ahmad [2018] 9 CLJ 691, has been said to have settled the law in regards to insurance claims where there is back dating of Insurance Cover Notes i.e.: the Policy being taken/issued, after the accident had occurred But the question remains; did the decision actually settle the law in this area?

The Facts

The accident occurred on 27.10.2011 at 1.30 am. The Insured bought the Policy on 27.10.2011 at 2.16 pm. The cover note stated the time of issue of the Policy, but the Certificate of Insurance only stated the date of cover i.e. 27.10.2011 to 26.10.2012.

. . .

*Managing Partner, Manoveera & Co.

+ I would like to put on record my utmost gratitude to my friends in the legal fraternity who contributed by advise and material to this article.

3. HUMAN ROBOTICS INTERFACE: AN ETHICAL AND LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   PRASHANT KHURANA* [2019] 1 LNS(A) lix

[2019] 1 LNS(A) lix

INDIA

---

HUMAN ROBOTICS INTERFACE: AN ETHICAL AND LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

PRASHANT KHURANA*

Abstract

Over the past few years, technological developments have considerably altered the landscape of societal interactions. Autonomous vehicles, household robots, voice assistants, all of which seemed to be vestiges of science fiction movies have begun to arrive at our doorsteps in some form or another. As these technologies proliferate, newer concerns have started to arise out of possible forms of interactions between the machines and their users. When children maltreated a robot in Japan, many began to wonder the impact such behavior with robots could have on their children’s social interactions with other humans. Many were confounded by the sense of pity they felt for the machine while watching the video of the incident. Researchers have been analyzing this curious aspect of projecting human-like qualities and feelings onto inanimate or non-human entities for decades.

. . .

* Student of LLB, Campus Law Center, Faculty of Law, Delhi University (Class of 2019); Bachelor of Arts (Hons.) in History, Hansraj College, Delhi University (Class of 2016). The article was supervised and reviewed by Mr. Pankaj Choudhary, Assistant Professor, Campus Law Center, University of Delhi.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert