PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman dan sabitan - Rayuan terhadap keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan - Tertuduh-tertuduh dituduh di Mahkamah Tinggi atas kesalahan membunuh si mati bawah s. 302 Kanun Keseksaan ('KK') - Si mati dikatakan mencuri komputer riba - Si mati dipukul, ditumbuk dan disepak sebelum ditekap dengan seterika wap panas ketika soal siasat pemerasan pengakuan - Si mati meninggal dunia akibat kecederaan luka lecur pada hampir 80% bahagian tubuh dengan 90 kesan lecur bakar - Mahkamah Tinggi mensabitkan tertuduh-tertuduh bawah s. 304(a) KK dan menjatuhkan hukuman 18 tahun penjara - Mahkamah Rayuan mensabitkan tertuduh-tertuduh atas kesalahan membunuh dan menjatuhkan hukuman gantung sampai mati - Sama ada elemen-elemen pertuduhan dibuktikan - Sama ada sabitan dan hukuman wajar

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kesalahan - Subahat - Si mati pelajar universiti - Si mati dikatakan mencuri komputer riba - Si mati dipukul, ditumbuk dan disepak sebelum ditekap dengan seterika wap panas ketika soal siasat pemerasan pengakuan - Si mati meninggal dunia akibat kecederaan luka lecur pada hampir 80% bahagian tubuh dengan 90 kesan lecur bakar - Sama ada tertuduh bersubahat - Sama ada subahat bawah ss. 304(a) atau 330 Kanun Keseksaan - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 109

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Kesalahan - Membunuh - Si mati pelajar universiti - Si mati dituduh mencuri komputer riba - Si mati dipukul, ditumbuk dan disepak sebelum ditekap dengan seterika wap panas ketika soal siasat pemerasan pengakuan - Si mati meninggal dunia akibat kecederaan luka lecur pada hampir 80% bahagian tubuh dengan 90 kesan lecur bakar - Sama ada elemen-elemen pertuduhan dibuktikan - Sama ada terdapat niat bersama - Sama ada keterangan mencukupi dan melampaui keraguan munasabah untuk sabitan bawah s. 304(a) dan bukan s. 302 Kanun Keseksaan

PERKATAAN & ISTILAH: 'lazimnya untuk menyebabkan kematian' - 'lazimnya' - Kanun Keseksaan, s. 300(c) - 'kebiasaannya atau selalunya membawa kematian' - Sama ada perkataan 'boleh' mempunyai maksud yang sama dengan 'lazimnya'

REVENUE LAW: Tax - Assessment - Losses of one company may be surrendered to reduce taxable gains made by other companies within group - Irrevocable election - Whether irrevocable election confined only to companies to which losses were transferred and amount surrendered and claimed accordingly or extended to cover actual amount claimed by claimant companies - Whether correction, amendment or revision made to amount of adjusted loss claimed by claimant companies violated requirement of 'irrevocable election' under s. 44A(2)(a)(iv) of Income Tax Act 1967 ('ITA') - Whether clear words of s. 44A prohibit taxpayer from claiming higher loss when overall amount of adjusted loss surrendered and claimed remain same - Whether 'irrevocable election' under s. 44A(2)(a)(iv) amenable to correction under 'error or mistake' under s. 131 of ITA - Whether invoking s. 131(1) has effect of revoking 'irrevocable election' - Whether gives room for 'error or mistake' to be redeemed - Whether s. 44A ought to remove unnecessary obstacles to companies harnessing its beneficial provision in tax planning - Whether just and reasonable for taxpayer to be granted relief under s. 131(1)

REVENUE LAW: Tax - Assessment - Losses of one company may be surrendered to reduce taxable gains made by other companies within group - Change and revision regarding amount apportioned as being claimed between claimant companies - Whether 'irrevocable election' remained in place - Whether same tax collected irrespective of change in amount utilised by claimant companies - Whether irrevocable election confined only to companies to which losses were transferred and amount surrendered and claimed accordingly or extended to cover actual amount claimed by claimant companies - Whether correction, amendment or revision made to amount of adjusted loss claimed by claimant companies violated requirement of 'irrevocable election' under s. 44A(2)(a)(iv) of Income Tax Act 1967 ('ITA') - Whether clear words of s. 44A prohibit taxpayer from claiming higher loss when overall amount of adjusted loss surrendered and claimed remain same - Whether 'irrevocable election' under s. 44A(2)(a)(iv) amenable to correction under 'error or mistake' under s. 131 of ITA - Whether invoking s. 131(1) has effect of revoking 'irrevocable election' - Whether gives room for 'error or mistake' to be redeemed - Whether s. 44A ought to remove unnecessary obstacles to companies harnessing its beneficial provision in tax planning - Whether just and reasonable for taxpayer to be granted relief under s. 131(1)

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction of statutes - Taxing statutes - Interpretation - Whether s. 44A and s. 131 of Income Tax Act 1967 ought to be interpreted harmoniously with each other - Whether 'irrevocable election' under s. 44A(2)(a)(iv) amenable to correction under 'error or mistake' under s. 131 - Whether s. 131(1) has effect of revoking 'irrevocable election' - Whether gives room for 'error or mistake' to be redeemed - Whether s. 44 should be read generously to remove unnecessary obstacles to companies harnessing its beneficial provision in tax planning

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Challenge against decision of Public Service Department - Pensions - Pensions regulated by Pensions Act 1951 and Pensions Adjustment Act 1980 amended by Pensions Adjustment (Amendment) Act 2013 - Amending Act changed pensions adjustment formulas - Changes affected those retired before 1 January 2013 - Impugned amendments resulted in situation less favourable to pensioners when compared with preceding retirement adjustment scheme - Demand by pensioners that retired before 1 January 2013 for pensions adjustments and payment of arrears - Pensions reverted to December 2012 - Whether there could be retrospective adjustments - Whether adjustment could be made without salary scale changes - Whether service circulars showed that salary revisions occurred - Whether judicial review sought abuse of process - Whether there was res judicata

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Public servants - Pensions - Pensions regulated by Pensions Act 1951 and Pensions Adjustment Act 1980 amended by Pensions Adjustment (Amendment) Act 2013 - Amending Act changed pensions adjustment formulas - Changes affected those retired before 1 January 2013 - Impugned amendments resulted in situation less favourable to pensioners when compared with preceding retirement adjustment scheme - Demand by pensioners that retired before 1 January 2013 for pension adjustments and payment of arrears - Pensions reverted to December 2012 - Whether there could be retrospective adjustments - Whether adjustment could be made without salary scale changes - Whether service circulars showed that salary revisions occurred

BANKING: Bank and banking business - Bank and customer - Customer co-borrower of loan granted by bank - Customer later adjudged as bankrupt - Various payments made into loan account since act of bankruptcy - No segregation of loan account between customer as bankrupt and as co-borrower - Bank continued to charge interest on loan account - Whether bank prohibited from charging interest in respect of customer's debt - Whether bank had realised security held within 12 months from date of bankruptcy order - Whether monies paid based on continued charging of interest amounted to overpayment and ought to be refunded to customer - Insolvency Act 1967, s. 8(2A)

DAMAGES: Assessment - Anton Piller order - Anton Piller order granted by High Court set aside by Court of Appeal - Assessment of damages payable - Whether damages incurred resulted from order - Quantum of damages entitled to, considering relevant factors and impact of failed order - Whether entitled to special, general, aggravated and exemplary damages - Factors considered in awarding damages

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judgments and orders - Anton Piller order - Anton Piller order granted by High Court set aside by Court of Appeal - Assessment of damages payable - Whether damages incurred resulted from order - Quantum of damages entitled to, considering relevant factors and impact of failed order - Whether entitled to special, general, aggravated and exemplary damages - Factors considered in awarding damages

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: Copyright - Infringement - Allegations that alleged infringer reproduced claimants' works without claimants' permission, consent or license - Whether works fell within meaning of 'artistic work' protected under Copyright Act 1987 - Whether works in form of drawings original in character and had been reduced to material form - Whether claimants had shown that sufficient efforts had been expended to render claimants' work original - Whether works complied with qualifications for copyright protection - Whether there was infringement of copyright - Whether there was sufficient objective similarity between original works or substantial part thereof and infringing copy - Whether there was causal connection between original works and infringing copy - Whether infringing copy copied from original work either directly or indirectly - Whether what had been infringed constituted substantial part of original works

TORT: Passing off - Claim - Allegations that alleged tortfeasor reproduced claimants' works without claimants' permission, consent or license - Whether there was goodwill and reputation attached to claimants' works by association with particular get-up which would be recognised by public as distinctive of claimants' goods and services - Whether there was misrepresentation on part of alleged tortfeasor which was likely to lead public to believe goods sold by alleged tortfeasor were those of claimants' - Whether claimants suffered or would suffer loss due to alleged tortfeasor's misrepresentation - Whether tort of passing off established

TORT: Unlawful interference - Claim - Allegations that alleged tortfeasor reproduced claimants' works without claimants' permission, consent or license - Whether alleged tortfeasor had interfered with claimants' trade or business by unlawful means and with intention to injure claimants

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judicial review - Application for - To quash decision of Director General of Inland Revenue ('DGIR') revoking tax exemption given to charitable foundation ('CF') under s. 44(6)(a) of Income Tax Act 1967 ('ITA') in 1970 - Decision to revoke made due to non-compliance with conditions for approval of tax exemption under s. 44(6) of ITA - No conditions were imposed when tax exemption was granted in 1970 - Whether decision to revoke tax exemption correct - Whether application for judicial review ('application') time-barred - Whether there was no full and frank disclosure - Whether 'Violation Point System' used to assess non-compliance of conditions made known to CF - Whether tax exemption, being gazetted, had similar status to subsidiary legislation - Whether CF had vested rights in tax exemption granted - Whether CF had legitimate expectation of continuous enjoyment of unconditional tax exemption

REVENUE LAW: Income tax - Exemption - Director General of Inland Revenue ('DGIR') revoked tax exemption granted under s. 44(6)(a) of Income Tax Act 1967 ('ITA') to charitable foundation ('CF') in 1970 - Revocation due to non-compliance with conditions for approval of tax exemption which were not originally imposed upon CF during granting of tax exemption in 1970 - Whether decision to revoke tax exemption correct - Whether 'Violation Point System' used to assess non-compliance of conditions made known to CF - Whether tax exemption, being gazetted, had similar status to subsidiary legislation