Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #5/2021 04 February 2021

New This Week Case(s) of the Week SELVA VINAYAGAM SURES v. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA & ORS [2021] 2 CLJ 29 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2021 Volume 2 (Part 1) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

SELVA VINAYAGAM SURES v. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA & ORS [2021] 2 CLJ 29
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
ABANG ISKANDAR CJ (SABAH AND SARAWAK); MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ; VERNON ONG LAM KIAT FCJ;
ZALEHA YUSOF FCJ; ZABARIAH MOHD YUSOF FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 05(HC)-270-11-2019(B)]
11 DECEMBER 2020

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Habeas corpus - Application for - Whether detention unlawful - Detention order issued pursuant to s. 6(1) of Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ('Act 316') - Grounds of detention order revealed detenu acting alone without participation from any other person - Whether detenu acting alone deemed to fall within ambit and scope of scrutiny under Act 316 - Whether scope explicitly confined to substantial body of persons - Whether there was failure to comply with rule of law - Whether detention order ultra vires art. 149 of Federal Constitution and Act 316 - Whether writ of habeas corpus ought to be issued

PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Habeas corpus - Writ - Application for - Detention under s. 6(1) of Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ('Act 316') - Grounds of detention order revealed detenu acting alone without participation from any other person - Whether detenu acting alone deemed to fall within ambit and scope of scrutiny under Act 316 - Whether scope explicitly confined to substantial body of persons - Whether there was failure to comply with rule of law - Whether detention order ultra vires art. 149 of Federal Constitution and Act 316 - Whether writ of habeas corpus ought to be issued

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Interpretation - Preamble to Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ('Act 316') - Whether Act to stop action prejudicial to public order taken or threatened by 'a substantial body of persons' - Whether Act 316 consonant with art. 149 of Federal Constitution - Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967, ss. 15 and 17A - Whether provides that short title, long title and preamble to Act 316 should be construed as part of Act 316 - Whether purpose and object of Act 316 should be read into s. 6(1) to give it meaning intended by Parliament - Whether interpretation and construction of any written law shall have regard to underlying purpose or object of the Act - Codification of purposive rule of construction - Whether includes purpose or object manifest in long title and preamble of Act

---

1. Ang Game Hong & Anor v. Tee Kim Tiam & Ors [2018] 1 LNS 2008 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Tee Kim Tiam v. Tan Ping Nah & Ors [Writ of Summons No: 21NCVC-29-03/2013]

2. Chow Kwee Chai v. PGL Vision Sdn Bhd [2018] 1 LNS 2009 (CA) affirming the High Court case of PGL Vision Sdn Bhd v. Chow Kwee Chai [Suit No: 22NCVC-184-11/2014]

Legal Network Series

[2018] 1 LNS 2243	AB AZIZ AB BAKAR lwn. MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 1. Tuntutan sivil berasaskan perlanggaran perkara-perkara di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan hanya boleh dibangkitkan terhadap badan perundangan atau eksekutif sahaja. Justeru, tindakan berasaskan perlanggaran Perlembagaan Persekutuan terhadap syarikat liabiliti terhad persendirian adalah sama sekali tidak boleh dipertahankan. 2. Tindakan untuk mencabar kesahihan pembekuan akaun bank menurut s. 47(1) Akta Kebankrapan 1967 telah menjadi akademik dan tidak boleh dipertahankan apabila pihak bank telah menarik balik sekatan pembekuan akaun tersebut. PROSEDUR SIVIL: Pembatalan - Tindakan - Kausa tindakan - Perlanggaran perkara 5 & 8 Perlembagaan Persekutuan - Tindakan oleh individu persendirian terhadap syarikat liabiliti terhad persendirian - Sama ada plaintif boleh membawa tindakan terdapat syarikat liabiliti terhad persendirian berasaskan perlanggaran perkara-perkara di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan - Sama ada tindakan plaintif boleh dipertahankan PROSEDUR SIVIL: Pembatalan - Tindakan - Kausa tindakan - Akademik - Tindakan untuk mencabar kesahihan pembekuan akaun bank menurut s. 47(1) Akta Kebankrapan 1967 - Pihak bank telah menarik balik sekatan pembekuan ke atas akaun bank plaintif - Sama ada tuntutan plaintif telah menjadi akademik - Sama ada tuntutan plaintif adalah satu penyalahgunaan proses mahkamah - Sama ada tuntutan plantif boleh dipertahankan Bagi pihak plaintif - Nadzratun Naim & Nurilya Ellyna; T/n Mohamed Hanifa & Associates Bagi pihak defendan - Nur Hamizah Bustami; T/n Shook Lin & Bok
[2018] 1 LNS 2244	MOHD YOMNI IDRIS lwn. SITI ESAH YAAKOB & YANG LAIN 1. Pendaftaran instrumen pindahmilik adalah berdasarkan rekod pemilikan di dalam sistem pendaftaran tanah berkomputer ('SPTB'). Justeru, tiada perlanggaran kewajipan berjaga-jaga dan tugas statutori dilakukan oleh pihak Pentadbir Tanah ketika membuat endorsmen penyaksian dan pendaftaran pindahmilik tanah atas nama plaintif yang dibuat secara suci hati berdasarkan SPTB tersebut. 2. Pembeli hartanah mempunyai kewajipan untuk memastikan pengesahan rasmi kedudukan tanah dibuat oleh pentadbir tanah sebelum berurusan untuk membeli tanah. Pembeli boleh menyumbang cuai dalam kerugiannya apabila pembeli hanya bersandar kepada tempat yang ditunjuk oleh penjual dan gagal untuk mengambil langkah-langkah berjaga-jaga sebelum melaksanakan pendaftaran pindahmilik. TORT: Kecuaian - Tugasan statutori - Kewajipan berkanun pentadbir tanah - Kewujudan pertindihan hak milik tanah dengan pihak ketiga - Geran hakmilik yang digunakan untuk pendaftaran hakmilik hartanah tidak wujud - Penyandaran kepada sistem pendaftaran tanah berkomputer ('SPTB') - Sama ada Pentadbir Tanah telah cuai dalam tugas ketika mengendalikan pendaftaran dan pengeluaran hakmilik hartanah - Sama ada kewajipan berjaga-jaga dan tugas statutari Pentadbir Tanah tertakluk kepada SPTB - Sama ada semakan hakmilik di dalam SPTB telah dibuat secara suci hati sebelum membuat penyaksian semasa proses pendaftaran hakmilik TORT: Kecuaian - Kecuaian sumbang - Jual beli tanah - Kegagalan pembeli untuk memastikan pengesahan rasmi kedudukan tanah dibuat oleh Pentadbir Tanah sebelum berurusan untuk membeli tanah - Pembeli hanya bersandar kepada tempat yang ditunjuk oleh penjual - Pembeli menyedari perbezaan butiran hartanah - Sama ada pembeli telah menyumbang cuai dalam kerugiannya - Sama ada pembeli sewajarnya mengambil langkah-langkah berjaga-jaga sebelum melaksanakan pendaftaran pindahmilik Bagi pihak plaintif/perayu - Mohd Syukran Mohd Noordin; T/n Syukran Noordin Bagi pihak defendan/responden - Nazlyza Mohamad Nazri & Mohd Zain Mat; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kelantan
[2019] 1 LNS 5	AHMAD MAHMUD HAMZAH & SATU LAGI lwn. MUHAMMAD IZZAT MOHD KHIR & KES YANG LAIN Latar belakang tempat kejadian perlu diambil kira ketika menentukan liabiliti di dalam kemalangan jalan raya. Seseorang pemandu seharusnya memperlahankan kenderaannya di kawasan jalan raya yang dikategorikan sebagai kawasan bahaya. Apabila pemandu membawa kenderaannya melebihi had laju yang ditetapkan di kawasan yang dikategorikan sebagai kawasan bahaya dan mengakibatkan kemalangan, maka pemandu tersebut seharusnya bertanggungan 100% ke atas kemalangan. LALULINTAS JALAN: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Penentuan liabiliti - Perlanggaran antara kereta, lori dan treler - Kereta telah cuba memotong lori dan telah memasuki lorong kiri tanpa menyedari kehadiran treler yang berada di lorang kiri - Kereta cuba mengelak pertembungan dengan treler tetapi gagal - Kereta dipandu melebihi had laju yang ditetapkan - Kemalangan di atas jalan raya yang dikategori sebagai kawasan bahaya - Kereta terbalik selepas kemalangan - Sama ada pemandu kereta sewajarnya memperlahankan kenderaan di kawasan jalan raya yang dikategorikan sebagai kawasan bahaya - Sama ada latar belakang tempat kejadian perlu diambil kira dalam menentukan liabiliti - Sama ada kemalangan berlaku sepenuhnya atas kecuaian pemandu LALULINTAS JALAN: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Penentuan liabiliti - Sama ada keterangan yang diberikan oleh seseorang pegawai penyiasat boleh dikesampingkan - Sama ada kesan gurisan pada jalan raya adalah kesan brek atau kesan jalan yang terkopek keluar - Sama ada sesuatu kemalangan perlu dilaporkan dalam tempoh masa 24 jam - Sama ada kelayakan pemandu kenderaan menggunakan kenderaannya perlu diambil kira dalam menentukan liabiliti Rayuan No. AB-12BNCvC-20-05/2018 Bagi pihak perayu-perayu - Kenneth William, T/n Kenneth William & Assoc Bagi pihak responden - R Kitharaj (menyebut bagi pihak), T/n Manian Raju & SS Yeong Rayuan No. AB-12BNCvC-21-05/2018 Bagi pihak perayu-perayu - Kenneth William, T/n Kenneth William & Assoc Bagi pihak responden 1 & 2 - R Kitharaj, T/n M Mahoharan & Co Bagi pihak responden 3 - R Kitharaj (menyebut bagi pihak), T/n Manian Raju & SS Yeong Bagi pihak responden 4 - Tidak diwakili Rayuan No. AB-12BNCvC-22-05/2018 Bagi pihak perayu-perayu - Kenneth William, T/n Kenneth William & Assoc Bagi pihak responden 1 & 2 - R Kitharaj, T/n M Mahoharan & Co Bagi pihak responden 3 - R Kitharaj (menyebut bagi pihak), T/n Manian Raju & SS Yeong Bagi pihak responden 4 - Tidak diwakili Rayuan No. AB-12BNCvC-23-05/2018 Bagi pihak perayu-perayu - Kenneth William, T/n Kenneth William & Assoc Bagi pihak resonden 1 - Kenneth William (menyebut bagi pihak), T/n Suhaidi & Co Bagi pihak responden 2 - Tidak diwakili Bagi pihak responden 3 - Kitharaj (menyebut bagi pihak), T/n Manian Raju & SS Yeong
[2019] 1 LNS 1412	INQUIRY COMMITTEE v. MOHAMMAD AZAM MOHAMAD TRUDIN 1. There is no breach of rules of natural justice when an advocate fails to appear to ventilate his case before the inquiry committee despite being given a chance to be heard. 2. An advocate and solicitor suffering from mental issues is not a fit and proper person as he is unable to represent his client's interests. In such circumstances, the defendant ought to be struck off the Roll by virtue of s. 13 of the Advocates Ordinance (Sarawak Cap 110). CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Action - Action to strike advocate and solicitor from the Roll - Advocate suffering from mental issues - Allegation of breach of rules of natural justice - Papers were duly served on advocate but he chose not to appear to ventilate his case before inquiry committee - Whether defendant was given chance to be heard before inquiry committee - Whether there was breach of natural justice LEGAL PROFESSION: Roll of advocates and solicitors - Struck off - Advocate suffering from mental issues - Whether defendant was a fit and proper person to be an advocate and to represent client's interests - Whether it was safe for defendant to practice law now and in the foreseeable future - Advocates Ordinance (Sarawak Cap 110), s. 13 Bagi pihak plaintif/For the plaintiff/For the public prosecution - Desmond Sahathevan of Messrs. Battenberg & Talma Bagi pihak defendan/For the defendant/For the accused - Peli Anak Aron of Peli Anak Aron Advocates
[2019] 1 LNS 1554	MOHAMMAD NIZAM BIN MD SAID v. MENTERI DALAM NEGERI & ORS 1. Where there was no specific period for the completed report of the inquiry officer to be submitted to the minister, it has to be done with "all convenient speed" as per s. 54(2) of the Interpretation Acts 1948. Since there was no unreasonable delay, the 13 days taken by the inquiry officer to submit a completed report to the minister was acceptable.. 2. The non-appearance of the investigating officer, being a crucial witness at the representation hearing, despite being issued a subpoena, had deprived the applicant of exercising his right to cross examine the investigating officer and had further prejudiced the applicant in making his representation. Such prejudice would entail the granting of an application for habeas corpus. PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Application for habeas corpus - Detention under s. 6(1) Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ('Act 1985') - Inquiry officer took 13 days to complete inquiry report and thereafter send report to minister - Allegation of delay in submission of Borang I to advisory board - Whether there was specific period for completed report of inquiry officer to be submitted to minister - Whether inquiry officer had submitted report to minister with all convenient speed - Whether Borang I was submitted as soon as practicable to advisory board PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Application for habeas corpus - Detention under s. 6(1) Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 - Deprivation of fair hearing - Non-appearance of investigating officer during representation hearing - Investigating officer failed to turn up despite advisory board issuing a subpoena - Whether investigating officer was a crucial witness - Whether absence of investigating officer had deprived applicant of exercising his right to cross examine officer concerned and had prejudiced applicant in making his representation - Whether application for habeas corpus should be allowed PREVENTIVE DETENTION: Detention order - Application for habeas corpus - Detention under s. 6(1) Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 ('Act 1985) - Chairman in his affidavit deposed that there was another representation held - Applicant was unaware of another representation - Whether deposition regarding another representation was a typographical error - Whether there was fundamental breach of Article 151(1)(b) of Federal Constitution and s. 10 of Act 1985 - Whether applicant was being detained without trial - Whether applicant was legally detained For the Applicant - Matthews Jude; M/s Naran Singh & Co. For the Respondents - Adilah Roslan

---

CLJ 2021 Volume 2 (Part 1)

In a case relating to the procedure to be adopted by a local authority in determining the assessment of the annual valuation of a hydroelectric power station (the property), consideration ought to be given to the fact that the functions and roles of each and every component of the plant, namely, the dam, the diversion water tunnel, tunnel liners and pipelines, spillway and closure of dam outlet are so closely interconnected that they ought rightly and properly to be taken as a single unit of machinery. The components indeed fall under the term 'machinery' as the term is defined in s. 2(b) of the Local Government Act 1976, and are collectively 'article production machinery' and exempt from assessment of the annual value of the property.
Majlis Daerah Hulu Terengganu v. Tenaga Nasional Bhd & Another Appeal [2021] 2 CLJ 1 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985, otherwise Act 316, is a special specie of enactment on preventive detention enacted pursuant to art 149 of the Federal Constitution (FC) under which the fundamental liberties prescribed under arts 5, 9, 10 and 13 of the FC may be circumscribed. This said, in interpreting the Executive's power of detention under s. 6(1) of Act 316, the long title and preamble to the Act ought to be properly construed and given effect to as part of the Act. The construction must further have regard to ss. 15 and 17A of the Interpretation Acts 1948/1967, the underlying object of the Act and the principle that any safeguard that the law provides for such detention must be liberally interpreted.
Bearing all these in mind, and notwithstanding that the words "a substantial body of persons" appearing in the preamble of Act 316 can nowhere be found in s. 6(1), the object of Act 316 should be read into s. 6(1) in order to give the sub-section the meaning intended by Parliament. It follows, hence, that the power under s. 6(1) may only be exercised if the following ingredients are set out in the grounds of the detention order and allegations of fact, namely, that: (i) the activity which has been taken or is being threatened by a substantial body of persons relates to or involves trafficking in dangerous drugs; (ii) the detenu is a member of a substantial body of persons; and (iii) the Minister is satisfied that it is necessary in the interest of public order that the detenu be subject to preventive detention. Be that as it may, since the detenu herein was acting alone, he cannot be caught by the ambit of Act 316. The detention order being a nullity, a writ of habeas corpus ought to issue to forthwith set the detenu at liberty.
Selva Vinayagam Sures v. Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Ors [2021] 2 CLJ 29 [FC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Faced with charges for trafficking and possession of dangerous drugs, the accused was convicted on all charges and sentenced, in respect of the trafficking charge, to life imprisonment; against which the prosecution's appeal lies. In view of the failure of the accused to satisfy the conditions provided under sub-s. 2(A) of s. 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, the Judicial Commissioner erred in not passing the mandatory death sentence for the offence under s. 39B.
Chandru Muniandy v. PP & Another Appeal [2021] 2 CLJ 48 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The Trade Marks Act 1976 ('TMA') implicitly recognises the right of a person to use his/her own name or in the case of a company, its own name. TMA recognises the use of one own's name in trade and that such use does not infringe another trade mark, though the same and registered, provided that such use is in good faith and amounts to a legal entitlement within the meaning of s. 41 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 for which a declaration of non-infringement ought to be issued to protect and allow such bona fide use.
Diesel S.p.A. v. Bontton Sdn Bhd [2021] 2 CLJ 65 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

An applicant, who owns a piece of land that is compulsorily acquired, is precluded from appealing against the approach taken by the High Court Judge in the valuation of a land when it is found that the purported questions of law posed is actually an appeal on the quantum awarded, which is barred by s. 49 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960.
Teguh Kemajuan Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah, Daerah Kota Tinggi & Anor And Other Appeals [2021] 2 CLJ 118 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The court, in the previous proceedings, declared that the purchaser was the rightful owner of the property and that the developer had no claim whatsoever against the property; the developer was thus barred or estopped by res judicata from relitigating the issue of ownership of the property in subsequent proceedings.
Nordin Md Zain v. Glomac Alliance Sdn Bhd [2021] 2 CLJ 133 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT:
   A VALID VARIATION ORDER – IMPORTANCE OF VARIATION ORDER IN WRITING ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by William Ting Siew Chon* [2021] 1 LNS(A) xvi

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xvi

MALAYSIA

---

CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT:
A VALID VARIATION ORDER – IMPORTANCE OF VARIATION ORDER IN WRITING

by
William Ting Siew Chon*

A man hired a contractor to renovate his kitchen.

The contractor said to the man that he was nearly done.

The homeowner said “no way that you are - there is a giant hole in the granite countertop!"

Frustrated with how long the renovation had taken, the homeowner started yelling at the contractor and his assistant, who was standing in the hallway outside of the kitchen, to leave.

"Get out now!" the man shouted.

Trying to allay his anger, the contractor asked for the homeowner to calm down and let his assistant into the kitchen with the part he needed.

"No!" the man replied angrily. "I'm going to sue you!"

. . .

*Messrs Tang & Partners, Sibu.

2. A LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMPULSORY DENTAL RECORD IN FORENSIC DENTAL IDENTIFICATION ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by SABARINA BINTI OMAR* [2021] 1 LNS(A) xvii

[2021] 1 LNS(A) xvii

MALAYSIA

---

A LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR COMPULSORY DENTAL RECORD IN FORENSIC DENTAL IDENTIFICATION

by
SABARINA BINTI OMAR*

ABSTRACT

Dental records are very useful in forensic identification during mass disasters and dental practitioners play a pivotal role in record keeping to ensure that patients’ dental records are properly managed. The objectives of this study are to investigate the reasons for non-compliance in the requirement for dental records and record keeping among dental practitioners in Malaysia, to compare the legal framework for dental records and record keeping procedures in other countries and to propose a legal framework for dental records and record keeping in all dental clinics in Malaysia, and to fulfil the need for forensic dental identification. A cross-sectional study using a questionnaire and interviews were conducted with participating dental practitioners to selfassess their awareness about the importance of dental records and record keeping and the related laws. The results of the study showed that dental records and record keeping are poorly complied with, both locally and internationally, at only about 38-45%.

. . .

*Dr Sabarina Binti Omar, Master of Enforcement Law, Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Enforcement Law, August 2020.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert