Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #6/2022 10 February 2022

New This Week Case(s) of the Week TENAGA NASIONAL BHD v. CHEW THAI KAY & ANOR [2022] 2 CLJ 333 Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2022 Volume 2 (Part 2) Articles CLJ Article(s) LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

TENAGA NASIONAL BHD v. CHEW THAI KAY & ANOR [2022] 2 CLJ 333
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
AZAHAR MOHAMED CJ (MALAYA); MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ; VERNON ONG LAM KIAT FCJ; ZALEHA YUSOF FCJ; RHODZARIAH BUJANG FCJ
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: 02(i)-28-07-2020 (A)]
04 JANUARY 2022

UTILITIES: Electric supply - Disconnection - Discovery of meter tampering at consumer's premises - Tampered meter rectified and replaced - Electricity supplier sent notice of disconnection - Whether electricity supplier could lawfully invoke amended s. 38(1) of Electricity Supply Act 1990 to disconnect electricity - Whether there must be continuing offence to invoke power of disconnection - Whether there was subsisting offence under s. 37(1) authorising disconnection - Balance of competing interest within scheme of Electricity Supply Act 1990 - Whether prerequisite for electricity supplier to disconnect supply before issuing statutory written statement to consumer

---

1. Dato' Mohamad Yusof A Bakar & Anor v. Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur [2019] 1 LNS 1494 (CA) overruling the High Court case Dato Mohamad Yusof A Bakar & Anor v. Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur [2018] 1 LNS 2123

2. Kembang Serantau Sdn Bhd v. YBK Usahasama Sdn Bhd [2019] 1 LNS 1515 (CA) overruling in part the High Court case Kembang Serantau Sdn Bhd v. YBK Usahasama Sdn Bhd [2018] 1 LNS 206

Legal Network Series

[2020] 1 LNS 145	MRCB BUILDERS SDN BHD v. WAZAM VENTURES SDN BHD & ANOTHER CASE 1. The Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 does not grant a respondent in adjudication the right to file a rejoinder. The respondent’s filing of a rejoinder may result in an adjudicator failing to deliver an adjudication decision within the prescribed timeline. When an adjudicator refuses an application to file a rejoinder, this does not in itself amounts to a breach of the second rule of natural justice. 2. An adjudicator complies with s. 12(4) of the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 if he provides at least one reason, however brief, for the adjudication decision and the Court cannot review the legality, correctness and adequacy of the reason. CONSTRUCTION LAW: Adjudication - Setting aside - Adjudicator allowed subcontractor's claim against main contractor for work done - Adjudicator dismissed request by respondent in adjudication proceedings to file rejoinder - Whether respondent in adjudication proceeding has right to file rejoinder - Whether adjudicator had committed error in law when dismissing request for rejoinder - Whether adjudicator had given reasons for adjudication decision - Whether adjudicator had complied with requirements under s. 12(4) of Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 ('CIPAA') - Whether adjudicator had breached second rule of natural justice - Whether errors and omissions of adjudicator could be remedied in arbitration pursuant to s. 13(c) of CIPAA CONSTRUCTION LAW: Adjudication - Stay - Applicant failed to apply for stay of adjudication decision under s. 16(1)(b) of Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 in originating summons - Interest of justice - Whether Court could decide stay application in interest of justice - Whether stay could be granted when applicant failed to satisfy that adjudicator has made a clear error in making adjudication decision - Whether respondent would be deprived of cash flow if stay granted For the MRCB - Maximillian Tai Kim Sen & Krishanthini Dewi Jeeva Kumar; M/s Moideen & Max For the Wazam - Ben Lee Kam Foo & Nur Amalin Shahida Sabidi; M/s Gan & Zul
[2020] 1 LNS 174	CHASWOOD RESOURCES SDN BHD v. COUTURE HOMES SDN BHD In garnishee proceedings, the burden of proof lies on the garnishee to prove that there is no debt due and owing to the defendant. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judgments and orders - Garnishee order - Setting aside - Defendant was a subsidiary of garnishee - Defendant's audited accounts showed garnishee owed a sum of money to defendant - Garnishee alleged defendant had waived debt - Defendant's audited accounts was prepared and lodged with Companies Commission after filing of plaintiff's application for order nisi - Whether garnishee had discharged burden of proof to show that there is no debt due and owing to defendant For the appellant garnishee - Eldarius Yong Zhen Jie, M/s Chellam Wong For the respondent judgment creditor - Alvin Lai Kok Wing, M/s Justin Voon Chooi & Win
[2020] 1 LNS 175	ISKANDAR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT v. SJIC BINA SDN BHD & ANOTHER APPEAL The entire Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 ('CIPAA') has prospective application only and therefore, it does not apply to construction contracts made before CIPAA came into force. As such, the adjudication decision on construction contracts made prior to CIPAA's implementation must be set aside. CONSTRUCTION LAW: Adjudication - Setting aside - Application pursuant to s. 15 of Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 ('CIPAA') - Improperly procured adjudication decision - Construction contract made before CIPAA came into force - Whether CIPAA applied prospectively or retrospectively - Whether CIPAA applicable to construction contract made before CIPAA came into force - Whether adjudication decision ought to be set aside For the appellant - James Monteiro Dhanaraj Vasudevan, Devandra Balasingam; M/s Kamil Hashim Raj & Lim For the respondent - T Kuhendran J Agesh Krishendra; M/s Zul Rafique & Partners
[2019] 1 LNS 1988	MUHAMMAD FAIZAL SUDIN lwn. PP Intipati pertuduhan yang perlu dibuktikan bagi kesalahan bawah s. 409 Kanun Keseksaan adalah berkenaan penyalahgunaan amanah oleh tertuduh untuk kegunaan sendiri dan adalah tidak perlu bagi pihak pendakwaan untuk membuktikan wang yang menjadi persoalan dalam pertuduhan telah dimasukkan ke dalam akaun tertuduh. UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Pecah Amanah Jenayah - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 409 - Pengurus kilang dengan curang menyalahgunakan wang yang telah diamanahkan kepadanya - Pembayaran berlebihan dibuat kepada pembekal bahan mentah berbanding dengan bahan mentah yang sebenarnya diterima - Sama ada tertuduh telah tidak amanah dalam menjalankan arahan yang diamanahkan kepadanya - Sama ada terdapat keperluan untuk pembuktian mengenai wang yang diterima oleh tertuduh dalam akaunnya bagi kesalahan bawah s. 409 Kanun Keseksaan - Sama ada tertuduh telah gagal mengikuti prosedur pembayaran yang biasa diamalkan Bagi pihak perayu - Saiful Ambar Abdullah Ambar; T/n Ambar & Azah Bagi pihak responden - TPR Rullizah Hj Abdul Majid; Unit Komersial dan Jenayah Siber, Bahagian Pendakwaan, Jabatan Peguam Negara.
[2019] 1 LNS 1968	REMCO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD lwn. PERSATUAN PENGANUT DEWA SRI MEENATCHI SOCKALINGESWARAR Pihak yang mendakwa telah diberi kebenaran oleh pemilik asal untuk terus menduduki tanah harus mengemukakan bukti-bukti nyata yang menunjukkan kebenaran tersebut telah diberikan oleh pemilik asal. Ketiadaan tindakan oleh kerajaan negeri atau agensi di bawahnya tidak bermakna kebenaran telah diberikan secara tersirat kepada suatu pihak untuk memasuki dan menduduki tanah tersebut. UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Pencerobohan - Permohonan untuk milikan kosong - Permohonan oleh pemilik berdaftar dan benefisiari - Pembinaan struktur kuil yang mencerobohi tanah yang dibeli plaintif - Pihak kuil mendakwa kerajaan negeri sebagai tuan punya asal hartanah telah memberikan persetujuan kepada pihak kuil untuk menduduki tanah sebelum plaintif memilikinya - Sama ada terdapat keterangan nyata bahawa pemilik semasa dan pemilik terdahulu telah memberi kebenaran untuk defendan memasuki dan menduduki tanah - Sama ada defendan telah menceroboh tanah - Sama ada hak plaintif untuk milikan tanah adalah serta merta selepas plaintif didaftarkan sebagai pemilik hartanah bawah s. 340 Kanun Tanah Negara 1965 PROSEDUR SIVIL: Prosiding terus pemilikan tanah - Permohonan untuk - Milikan kosong - Pembinaan struktur kuil yang mencerobohi tanah yang dibeli plaintif - Kegagalan mengemukakan keterangan nyata yang menunjukkan kebenaran telah diberikan oleh pemilik asal dan pemilik semasa untuk defendan terus menduduki tanah - Sama ada defendan adalah penceroboh yang menduduki tanah milik plaintif - Sama ada terdapat isu-isu untuk dibicarakan - Sama ada plaintif sebagai pemilik berdaftar berhak untuk pemilikan serta-merta - Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 89 Bagi pihak perayu - Ramachandran Nana Pulle; T/n NP Ramachandran & Associates Bagi pihak responden - Effendi Syah Noordin; T/n Effendi & Co

---

CLJ 2022 Volume 2 (Part 2)

In a medical negligence action, where the injuries caused (herein serious brain injury resulting in plaintiff being in vegetative state) has been proved and the hospital has been found solely liable, damages should be awarded for loss of earnings, special damages, value of care and for pain and suffering, and for loss of amenities of life et cetera; it should be noted, however, that in awarding such damages, once a multiplier therefor has been decided, there is no more logic to make a further deduction on the quantum awarded.
Pantai Medical Centre Sdn Bhd v. Fareed Reezal Arund & Another Appeal [2022] 2 CLJ 173 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

A defendant in a defamation suit, who has executed a consent judgment to withdraw the impugned defamatory statement and to refrain from repeating the same but went on nonetheless to thereafter repeat and publish the statement, has clearly committed an act of contempt and is susceptible to be slapped with a contempt order; likewise, his solicitor too, for advising, aiding or abetting him to repeat the contemptuous factual matters, could be equally guilty of contempt, and be liable to be censored accordingly.
Saraswathy Kandasami v. Datuk Saravanan Murugan & Another Appeal [2022] 2 CLJ 202 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

An ex parte injunction could not be extended beyond 21 days. The execution of an Anton Piller order, after its expiry, is illegal and an invalid execution, apart from being an abuse of court process. Such non-compliance could not be corrected by subsequent compliance.
Ageson Enterprise Sdn Bhd (Formerly Known As Esa Pile Sdn Bhd) v. LKD Trading Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) [2022] 2 CLJ 226 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In an action for striking out, inexcusable delay in prosecuting the claim or appeal thereon can be decisive in sealing the fate of the plaintiff. Where the Director General of Inland Revenue ('DGIR'), after filing an appeal in July 2014 against the decision of the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, had sit on the appeal and had practically done nothing on it and not bothering even to follow up with the finalised case stated until June 2019, whereof it affirmed its intention to proceed with the appeal, then such inexplicable and inordinate delay must or must be deemed to have seriously prejudiced and caused serious financial hardship to the defendant taxpayer; it needs no emphasis that the DGIR's appeal ought to be struck off for want of prosecution.
Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri v. Pulai Spring Resort Sdn Bhd [2022] 2 CLJ 247 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

(i) Members of the Ahmadiyya sect are generally not Muslims and are not to be subjected to the dictates of Islamic law or statute, or any Syariah investigation or prosecution. However, to properly determine their constitutional and legal status, a differentiation must be made between those who were adherents of the faith by origin, and those who were professing the religion of Islam before embracing the doctrinal beliefs of the Ahmadiyya sect. The Civil Court is seized with jurisdiction to deal with those in the first category but not in the second; for the latter category, the right to determine belongs exclusively to the Syariah Court.
(ii) The Ahmadiyya worshippers in this judicial review application are made up of those who were born into Ahmadiyya families and were Ahmadiyya adherents by origin, and Muslims who had subsequently come to adopt the Ahmadiyya faith. Clearly, the applicants in the second category who are Malaysians fall squarely within the 'renunciation' cases and would therefore come within the jurisdiction of the Islamic Authorities respondents, and be subject to the two fatwas herein, until and unless they obtain an order from the Syariah Court that they are followers of the Ahmadiyya sect.
Maqsood Ahmad & Ors v. Ketua Pegawai Penguatkuasa Agama & Ors [2022] 2 CLJ 259 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Winding-up proceedings are not subject to or caught by an arbitration agreement. An arbitration agreement does not stop a party from presenting and proceeding with a winding-up petition. The proper test to be applied for the grant of a Fortuna injunction where there is an arbitration agreement or clause is for the applicant to establish a prima facie dispute that the debt falls within the arbitration agreement.
PRPC Utilities And Facilities Sdn Bhd v. PBJV Group Sdn Bhd & Anor [2022] 2 CLJ 276 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Construction work contracts, to which the Government is a party, is not included in the list of categories of contracts set out in the Schedule to Part II of the Temporary Measures for Reducing The Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Act 2020 ('Covid-19 Act'). If Parliament had intended to include Government construction work contracts in item 1 in the list of categories of contracts as set out in the Schedule for the purposes of s. 7 of the Covid-19 Act, it would have provided words to that effect. By not having done so, Government construction work contracts were meant to be covered by necessary implication.
SN Akmida Holdings Sdn Bhd v. Kerajaan Malaysia [2022] 2 CLJ 302 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

CLJ Article(s)

1. Gender Discrimination An Affront To Common Sense
   An Observation Of The Recent Decision In Suraini Kempe & Ors v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors [2021] 9 CLJ 979 ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Kevin De Rozario* [2022] 2 CLJ(A) i

[2022] 2 CLJ(A) i

MALAYSIA

---

Gender Discrimination An Affront To Common Sense
An Observation Of The Recent Decision In Suraini Kempe & Ors v. Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors [2021] 9 CLJ 979

by
Kevin De Rozario*

Introduction

The drafters of the Federal Constitution (FC) had in mind a framework to serve and administer the rule of law in a manner that would produce a just and fair result depending on the circumstances of the case, to all sections of society and walks of life. Equality and arbitrariness have got no place in the Constitution. The Judiciary who is the third branch of the Government plays a vital role. Judicial dynamism is expected of judges in a country with a written Constitution to protect social justice within the Constitutional framework; more so when they have taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

Citizenship is embodied in Part 3 of the Constitution which is further divided into three chapters which are Chapter 1 (Acquisition of Citizenship), Chapter 2 (Termination of Citizenship), Chapter 3 (Supplemental) and the provisions of the Second Schedule. Each country and nation places importance and emphasis on the acquisition of citizenship, and stringent requirements are normally placed on those who are not born in that particular country, however due deliberation and consideration need to be given in exceptional and extenuating circumstances.

. . .

* Senior Litigation Partner, M/s Khairuddin Ngiam & Tan

LNS Article(s)

1. ETHICS AND STANDARDS IN PRACTICE: FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES^{+ [Read excerpt]}
   by Rob Reis* [2022] 1 LNS(A) xiii

[2022] 1 LNS(A) xiii

AUSTRALIA

---

ETHICS AND STANDARDS IN PRACTICE: FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES⁺

by
Rob Reis*

Under Rule 4 of the ACT Solicitors Conduct Rules, a solicitor must be honest in all dealings in the course of legal practice, and deliver legal services competently, diligently, and as promptly as reasonably possible. In this case study, disciplinary proceedings led to a solicitor being removed from the roll when a judge determined that the solicitor's remorse and insight were not accompanied by evidence of genuine recognition of wrongdoing.

On 8 September 2021, the Tasmanian Supreme Court delivered its decision in disciplinary proceedings against one of its solicitors. Brett J, presiding, made an order recommending that Mr William Frederick Lester be removed from the roll of legal practitioners.^[1]

Mr Lester was admitted to the roll of legal practitioners in the ACT Supreme Court, and commenced practice in the ACT. By the time the Tasmanian decision was delivered, Mr Lester had retired from practice. He has since not held a practising certificate.

. . .

+ Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos No. 262 Summer 2021.

* Professional Standards Manager, ACT Law Society.

2. ENFORCEMENT OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY IN THE WORKPLACE: A MALAYSIAN PERSPECTIVE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Nor Hasliza Mat Hasan^[i] Tengku Noor Azira Tengku Zainudin^[ii] [2022] 1 LNS(A) xiv

[2022] 1 LNS(A) xiv

MALAYSIA

---

ENFORCEMENT OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY IN THE WORKPLACE:
A MALAYSIAN PERSPECTIVE

by
Nor Hasliza Mat Hasan^[i]
Tengku Noor Azira Tengku Zainudin^[ii]

ABSTRACT

Occupational safety is one of the most significant issues concerning the workplace. Enforcement of occupational safety at the workplace in Malaysia is conducted by the Department of Occupational Safety and Health ('DOSH'). The OSHA 1994 in enforcing the law and examine the importance of mastering the knowledge in management on the part of the legal authorities. This ensures that they will be better equipped to carry out enforcement at the workplace effectively. The research focused on conceptual analysis, and it examines literature from various research journals and papers. The study found that legal and management disciplines have equally important aspects that are essential to be emphasised by the legal authorities to ensure the effectiveness of the enforcement of occupational safety at the workplace.

. . .

[i] Faculty of Business, Multimedia University, Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, 75450 Melaka, Malaysia. Email: norhasliza.hasan@mmu.edu.my.

[ii] Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600, Bangi, Selangor. Email: tna@ukm.edu.my.

3. SHOULD THE RIGHTS OF REFUGEES BE PROTECTED? A STUDY FROM A JURISPRUDENCE PERSPECTIVE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Shahrul Mizan Bin Ismail^[i] Anbahnanthy G Krishnan Murthy^[ii] Visalini Sivaji^[iii] [2022] 1 LNS(A) xv

[2022] 1 LNS(A) xv

INTERNATIONAL

---

SHOULD THE RIGHTS OF REFUGEES BE PROTECTED?
A STUDY FROM A JURISPRUDENCE PERSPECTIVE

by
Shahrul Mizan Bin Ismail^[i]
Anbahnanthy G Krishnan Murthy^[ii]
Visalini Sivaji^[iii]

ABSTRACT

A refugee is someone who has fled violence, conflict, war, persecution and crossed an international territory or border to find asylum in another State. They have a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, which results in them being unable to return to their country of origin. Despite having legal frameworks to protect the rights of the refugees, the States continue to violate those rights by discriminating against them in various ways. This article aims to address the refugee crisis from the jurisprudence perspective. The objective of this paper is to discuss the issues related to refugees in Malaysia and the discrimination faced by them generally. In addition, this paper also discusses the obligations of the States under the treaty and customary international law to protect the rights of the refugees. The results of this study will provide exposure to the thoughts of selected jurists on how the refugee crisis should be addressed in Malaysia.

. . .

[i] LLB (Hons) (IIUM), LLM (Human Rights) (Nottingham), PhD (UKM); Advocate & Solicitor (Malaya) (Non-practising); Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, the National University of Malaysia (UKM).

[ii] [iii] Third Year Law Student, Faculty of Law, the National University of Malaysia (UKM).

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert