Back to Top

    CLJ Bulletin, Issue 2015, Vol 14
03 April 2015



Print this page
Introduction:

To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription

Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe


New This Week

1. Cases(s) Of The Week

a) PP lwn. RAHIMAN SELAMAT & KES YANG LAIN

2. Latest Cases

a) Legal Network Series

b) CLJ 2015 Volume 3 (Part 1)

3. Articles

a) Legal Network Series Article(s)

4. Legislation Highlights

a) Principal Acts

b) Amending Acts

c) PU(A)

d) PU(B)


CASES(S) OF THE WEEK

PP lwn. RAHIMAN SELAMAT & KES YANG LAIN
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
AHMAD MAAROP H
[RAYUAN JENAYAH NO: 42A-21-2001, 42A-20-2001 & 42A-29-2001]
26 JUN 2003

KETERANGAN: Pernyataan - Kebolehterimaan masuk - Pernyataan tertuduh selepas notis di bawah s. 45(3) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Sama ada serupa dengan percakapan beramaran di bawah s. 113(1) Kanun Tatacara Jenayah dan s. 37A(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada pernyataan boleh diterima masuk sebagai keterangan - Sama ada 'mixed statement' - Pendekatan bagi menerima masuk pernyataan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 45(3)

KETERANGAN: Saksi - Rakan sejenayah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Kebolehterimaan keterangan - Sama ada keterangan memerlukan sokongan - Sama ada tertuduh-tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Makna rakan sejenayah - Skop dan efek s. 44(1)(b) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 44(1)(b)

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Seksyen 11(a) - Rayuan - Timbalan Pendakwa Raya ('tertuduh') menyetuju terima jam tangan dan manfaat mendiami premis sewa secara percuma - Sama ada tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Sama ada keterangan pernyataan tertuduh di bawah s. 45(1) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 boleh diterima - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 42(1) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 timbul dan terpakai - Sama ada elemen kesalahan dibuktikan - Sama ada hukuman berpatutan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, ss. 11(a), 42(1), 45(1)

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Rasuah - Pernyataan - Pernyataan tertuduh selepas notis di bawah s. 45(3) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Sama ada serupa dengan percakapan beramaran di bawah s. 113(1) Kanun Tatacara Jenayah dan s. 37A(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada pernyataan boleh diterima masuk sebagai keterangan - Sama ada 'mixed statement' - Pendekatan bagi menerima masuk pernyataan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 45(3)

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Rasuah - Rakan sejenayah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Kebolehterimaan keterangan - Sama ada keterangan memerlukan sokongan - Sama ada tertuduh-tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Makna rakan sejenayah - Skop dan efek s. 44(1)(b) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 44(1)(b)

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2013] 1 LNS 402

MOHAMAD KHAIRUDIN ZAKARIA lwn. PENGARAH HOSPITAL KUALA LUMPUR & YANG LAIN

TORT: Kecuaian - Kecuaian profesional - Kecuaian perubatan - Pembedahan - Risiko pembedahan - Lumpuh selepas pembedahan - Sama ada lumpuh yang dialami oleh plaintif adalah berpunca daripada kecuaian akibat daripada pembedahan yang telah dijalankan - Sama ada lumpuh merupakan risiko yang dihadapi akibat pembedahan

TORT: Kecuaian - Kecuaian profesional - Kecuaian perubatan - Rawatan dengan kadar yang segera - Pilihan kaedah perubatan - Sama ada rawatan dengan kadar segera yang telah dijalankan merupakan pilihan yang sesuai - Sama ada rawatan secara tunggu dan lihat adalah sesuai - Sama ada terdapat risiko kelumpuhan yang lebih teruk pada seluruh anggota badan plaintif jika rawatan tidak diberikan dengan kadar yang segera

TORT: Kecuaian - Kewajipan berjaga-jaga - Pembedahan - Sama ada pembedahan yang telah dijalankan adalah secara cekap dan berkebolehan

TORT: Kecuaian - Liabiliti secara vikarius - Liabiliti hospital atas tindakan doktor atau kakitangan - Sama ada pihak hospital bertanggungan secara vikarius terhadap mana-mana doktor atau kakitangan yang telah cuai dalam tanggungjawabnya

TORT: Kecuaian - Rantaian penyebab - Kecuaian perubatan - Sama ada lumpuh yang dialami oleh plaintif adalah berikutan pembedahan yang telah dijalankan oleh doktor

[2013] 1 LNS 520

BILLION REVIEW (M) SDN BHD lwn. BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA KONDOMINIUM LANGAT JAYA

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Tindakan - Pemulaan - Tindakan pra-matang - Sama ada tindakan yang telah dimulakan oleh plaintif adalah pra-matang - Sama ada plaintif telah menggunapakai remedi yang sedia ada sebelum pemfailan tindakan di mahkamah

UNDANG-UNDANG PENTADBIRAN: Remedi-Remedi - Mengunapakai remedi yang sedia ada - Remedi domestik dalaman - Pertikaian berkenaan dengan akaun penyenggaran bangunan - Sama ada plaintif mempunyai remedi domestik dalaman untuk dirujuk jika berlaku pertikaian berkenaan dengan akaun penyenggaran bangunan - Akta Bangunan & Harta Bersama (Penyelengaraan & Pengurusan) 2007, s. 16(5)

[2013] 1 LNS 566

FINDER INDUSTRIES (M) SDN BHD lwn. M B PRODUCTS (M) SDN BHD

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman terus - Pelanggaran tanda niaga - Injunksi menghalang pelanggaran tanda niaga - Kes yang nyata dan terang - Sama ada intipati s. 38(1) Akta Cap Dagangan 1976 telah dibuktikan dengan jelas untuk mendapatkan penghakiman

PROSEDUR SIVIL: Penghakiman terus - Isu-isu untuk dibicarakan - Pelanggaran tanda niaga - Sama ada terdapat isu pertentangan fakta dan undang-undang yang harus ditentukan berdasarkan perbicaraan - Sama ada aktiviti defendan tergulung kepada perjalanan perniagaan atau perjalanan perdagangan

HARTA INTELEKTUAL: Tanda niaga - Pelanggaran - Kewujudan dua tanda niaga yang sama oleh dua entiti berasingan - Sama ada perbuatan defendan telah melanggar tanda niaga plaintif dan menimbulkan kekeliruan di kalangan pelanggan di Malaysia - Sama ada defendan yang telah menggunakan tanda niaga plaintif dalam perjalanan perdagangan di Malaysia

[2014] 1 LNS 521

BI CREDIT & LEASING BERHAD v. HUATLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & ANOR

LAND LAW: Strata title - Developer - Breach of undertaking - Non-delivery by 1st defendant developer of the original strata title of the Property to plaintiff – 1st defendant not privy to the Loan Agreement between plaintiff lender and purchaser, NCSB - Whether plaintiff aware that MOT in NCSB's favour was executed with the strata title and delivered to 2nd defendant as letter was copied to plaintiff - Whether 1st defendant breached letter of undertaking - Whether 1st defendant fulfilled the undertaking by delivering said documents to 2nd defendant

LAND LAW: Transfer - Fraud – 2nd defendant's firm appointed to perfect the transfer to NCSB - Whether 2nd defendant committed fraud in course of the transfer to NCSB - Whether 2nd defendant was merely acting on the instructions of 1st defendant to transfer the property to NCSB and present the transfer for registration - Whether plaintiff established beyond reasonable doubt that 2nd defendant committed fraud

TORT: Negligence - Duty of care - Whether 1st defendant owed a duty of care to plaintiff

[2014] 1 LNS 630

PP v. TAIB MARQUAS

CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - s. 302 - Murder - Whether deceased died as a result of injuries sustained - Whether accused inflicted injuries on deceased - Whether intention to hit deceased on the head was deliberate to cause grievous injury - Force used to inflict such an injury on victim's head - Whether accused caused grievous bodily injury on deceased that led to his death - Whether accused rebutted the prosecution evidence or successfully cast any doubt - Whether Prosecution proved their case beyond reasonable doubt

CLJ 2015 Volume 3 (Part 1)

COURT

COURT OF APPEAL

Awangku Dewa Pgn Momin & Ors v. Superintendent Of Lands And Surveys, Limbang Division
(Civil Procedure; Land Law - Native customary rights - Whether descendants could claim for compensation - Whether appeal against arbitrator's decision disguised as reference) [2015] 3 CLJ 1 [CA]

Goh Ming Han v. PP
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Failure to subject prosecution's evidence to maximum evaluation) [2015] 3 CLJ 17 [CA]

Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Chou Ka Ping
(Legal Profession - Disciplinary Committee - Failure of coram - Whether court should exercise discretion to allow rehearing before newly-constituted Disciplinary Committee) [2015] 3 CLJ 28 [CA]

PP v. Nadaraja Rajoo
(Criminal Law; Criminal Procedure - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Plea of guilt to alternative charge under s. 39A(2) - Adequacy of sentence - Criminal Procedure Code s. 171A) [2015] 3 CLJ 37 [CA]

PP lwn. Suhardi Idris
(Undang-undang Jenayah; Prosedur Jenayah - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Pengakuan bersalah atas pertuduhan alternatif - Peruntukan hukuman di bawah s. 39A(2) - Kesetimpalan) [2015] 3 CLJ 43 [CA]

PP v. Tiong King Guan & Anor
(Criminal Procedure - Transfer of cases - Whether case should be dealt with according to procedure under s. 177A of Criminal Procedure Code) [2015] 3 CLJ 48 [CA]

Tetuan Sri Ling & Associates v. Lian Meng Wah
(Bankruptcy; Civil Procedure - Undischarged bankrupt - Whether legally competent to prosecute appeal - Whether sanction from Director General of Insolvency necessary - Failure to state decision appealed against in notice of appeal) [2015] 3 CLJ 63 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Perview Development Sdn Bhd lwn. Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah & Satu Lagi
(Prosedur Sivil - Semakan kehakiman - Permohonan - Sama ada boleh difailkan bersekali dengan permohonan lanjutan masa) [2015] 3 CLJ 85 [HC]

PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain
(Keterangan; Undang-undang Jenayah - Pernyataan s. 45(3) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Sama ada boleh diterima masuk sebagai keterangan - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Sama ada tertuduh boleh disabit atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

BANKRUPTCY

Capacity of bankrupt - Meaning of 'injury to person' - Respondent an undischarged bankrupt - Respondent obtained judgment in default against appellant - Late filing of notice of appointment to assess damages - Senior Assistant Registrar allowed application to set aside judgment in default - Appeal to judge-in chambers - Whether respondent legally competent to prosecute appeal - Whether requirement of sanction from Director General of Insolvency necessary - Bankruptcy Act 1967, s. 38(1)(a)
Tetuan Sri Ling & Associates v. Lian Meng Wah
(Mohamad Ariff Yusof, Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Idrus Harun JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 63 [CA]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Notice of appeal - Appellant obtained judgment in default against respondent - Late filing of notice of appointment to assess damages - Senior Assistant Registrar allowed application to set aside judgment in default - Appeal to judge-in chambers - Failure to state decision appealed against in notice of appeal - Whether non-compliance occasioned miscarriage of justice or prejudiced appellant - Rules of Court 2012, Form 114
Tetuan Sri Ling & Associates v. Lian Meng Wah
(Mohamad Ariff Yusof, Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Idrus Harun JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 63 [CA]

Arbitration - Application against arbitration award - Land acquisition - Claim for compensation as descendants - Reference to High Court - Whether arbitration award could be challenged - Whether appeal against arbitration's decision disguised as reference - Whether question purely on question of law - Arbitration Act 2005, ss. 36, 37, 42
Awangku Dewa Pgn Momin & Ors v. Superintendent Of Lands And Surveys, Limbang Division
(Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, David Wong Dak Wah, Tengku Maimun JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 1 [CA]

CRIMINAL LAW

Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1) - Section s. 12(2) - Accused pleaded guilty to alternative charge under s. 39A(2) - Prosecution withdrew one charge after accused pleaded guilty to another - Adequacy of sentence - Whether court bound to consider withdrawn charge in imposing sentence - Whether sentence of nine years imprisonment and ten strokes of rotan adequate - Criminal Procedure Code, s. 171A
PP v. Nadaraja Rajoo
(Linton Albert, Rohana Yusuf, Zakaria Sam JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 37 [CA]

Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Section 39B(1)(a) - Trafficking in 105.60g of methamphetamine - Whether presumption of trafficking under s. 37(da) rebutted - Conviction and sentence for possession of drugs - Whether accused person had custody or control of drugs - Whether accused person had exclusive access to premises where drugs were found - Presumption of knowledge - Discrepancies in prosecution's evidence - Failure to subject prosecution's evidence to maximum evaluation - Whether reasonable doubt raised in prosecution's case - Whether conviction and sentence safe - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss. 12(2), 37(d)
Goh Ming Han v. PP
(Mohtarudin Baki, Zakaria Sam, Abdul Rahman Sebli JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 17 [CA]

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Appeal - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Discrepancies in prosecution's evidence - Material contradiction of prosecution witness - Whether detrimental to prosecution's case - Whether container containing drugs recovered from police search - Failure to subject prosecution's evidence to maximum evaluation - Whether reasonable doubt raised in prosecution's case
Goh Ming Han v. PP
(Mohtarudin Baki, Zakaria Sam, Abdul Rahman Sebli JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 17 [CA]

Sentence - Adequacy of sentence - Appeal by prosecution - Plea of guilt as mitigating factor - First time offender - Whether quantity of drugs and severity of offence taken into consideration - Whether sentence in trend with other decisions of court - Concept of sentence - Rehabilitation - Whether appellate intervention warranted
PP v. Nadaraja Rajoo
(Linton Albert, Rohana Yusuf, Zakaria Sam JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 37 [CA]

Transfer of cases - Jurisdiction of Court - Power of Public Prosecutor - Whether case should be remitted back to lower court for trial - Whether case should be dealt with according to procedure under s. 177A of Criminal Procedure Code
PP v. Tiong King Guan & Anor
(Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Idrus Harun, Abdul Rahman Sebli JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 48 [CA]

LAND LAW

Customary land - Native customary rights - Claim for compensation for acquired land in capacity as descendants - Rightful owner of land ceded rights over parcels land by handing them to Rajah of Sarawak in return for yearly payment - Whether descendants had rights - Whether descendants could claim for compensation
Awangku Dewa Pgn Momin & Ors v. Superintendent Of Lands And Surveys, Limbang Division
(Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, David Wong Dak Wah, Tengku Maimun JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 1 [CA]

LEGAL PROFESSION

Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary Committee - Failure of coram - Whether to be re-heard before properly constituted Disciplinary Committee - Lapse of nine years pending disposal of appeal - Whether court should exercise discretion to allow rehearing before newly-constituted Disciplinary Committee
Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Chou Ka Ping
(Abdul Wahab Patail, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 28 [CA]

Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary Committee - Whether properly constituted - Whether coram failure rendered report to Disciplinary Board nullity - Whether coram failure curable by endorsement of report - Legal Profession Act 1976, s. 103D(1) & (2)
Majlis Peguam Malaysia v. Chou Ka Ping
(Abdul Wahab Patail, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, Umi Kalthum Abdul Majid JJCA) [2015] 3 CLJ 28 [CA]

INDEKS PERKARA

KETERANGAN

Pernyataan - Kebolehterimaan masuk - Pernyataan tertuduh selepas notis di bawah s. 45(3) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Sama ada serupa dengan percakapan beramaran di bawah s. 113(1) Kanun Tatacara Jenayah dan s. 37A(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada pernyataan boleh diterima masuk sebagai keterangan - Sama ada 'mixed statement' - Pendekatan bagi menerima masuk pernyataan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 45(3)
PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain
(Ahmad Maarop H) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

Saksi - Rakan sejenayah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Kebolehterimaan keterangan - Sama ada keterangan memerlukan sokongan - Sama ada tertuduh-tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Makna rakan sejenayah - Skop dan efek s. 44(1)(b) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997,s. 44(1)(b)
PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain
(Ahmad Maarop H) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

PROSEDUR JENAYAH

Hukuman - Kesetimpalan - Pengedaran 48.6 gram heroin dan 21.8 gram monoacetylmorphines - Hukuman tujuh tahun penjara dan sepuluh sebatan - Sama ada kesan pencegahan dan kepentingan awam diberi kepentingan - Sama ada hukuman mengikut trend kes terdahulu - Sama ada kesalahan serius - Sama ada hukuman yang dijatuhkan setimpal - Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952, s. 39A(2)
PP lwn. Suhardi Idris
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun, Abdul Rahman Sebli HHMR) [2015] 3 CLJ 43 [CA]

Hukuman - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Faktor-faktor mitigasi - Sama ada hakim bicara terlalu memberi penekanan kepada kepentingan peribadi responden - Sama ada campur tangan rayuan adalah wajar
PP lwn. Suhardi Idris
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun, Abdul Rahman Sebli HHMR) [2015] 3 CLJ 43 [CA]

PROSEDUR SIVIL

Semakan kehakiman - Lanjutan masa - Permohonan - Sama ada plaintif boleh memfailkan saman pemula untuk lanjutan masa - Sama ada plaintiff boleh memfailkan semakan kehakiman bersekali dengan permohonan lanjutan masa - Kaedah-kaedah Mahkamah 2012, A. 53
Perview Development Sdn Bhd lwn. Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah & Satu Lagi
(Abu Bakar Katar PK) [2015] 3 CLJ 85 [HC]

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH

Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 39B(2) - Pengedaran 48.6 gram heroin dan 21.8 gram monoacetylmorphines - Pengakuan bersalah atas pertuduhan alternatif di bawah s. 12(2) - Peruntukan hukuman di bawah s. 39A(2) - Sama ada hukuman yang dijatuhkan setimpal
PP lwn. Suhardi Idris
(Mohtarudin Baki, Tengku Maimun, Abdul Rahman Sebli HHMR) [2015] 3 CLJ 43 [CA]

Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Seksyen 11(a) - Rayuan - Timbalan Pendakwa Raya ('tertuduh') menyetuju terima jam tangan dan manfaat mendiami premis sewa secara percuma - Sama ada tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Sama ada keterangan pernyataan tertuduh di bawah s. 45(1) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 boleh diterima - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 42(1) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 timbul dan terpakai - Sama ada elemen kesalahan dibuktikan - Sama ada hukuman berpatutan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, ss. 11(a), 42(1), 45(1)
PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain (Ahmad Maarop H) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

Rasuah - Pernyataan - Pernyataan tertuduh selepas notis di bawah s. 45(3) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Sama ada serupa dengan percakapan beramaran di bawah s. 113(1) Kanun Tatacara Jenayah dans. 37A(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Sama ada pernyataan boleh diterima masuk sebagai keterangan - Sama ada 'mixed statement' - Pendekatan bagi menerima masuk pernyataan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 45(3)
PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain
(Ahmad Maarop H) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

Rasuah - Rakan sejenayah - Sama ada pemberi atau penerima rasuah rakan sejenayah - Kebolehterimaan keterangan - Sama ada keterangan memerlukan sokongan - Sama ada tertuduh-tertuduh boleh disabitkan atas keterangan pemberi atau penerima rasuah - Makna rakan sejenayah - Skop dan efek s. 44(1)(b) Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997 - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, s. 44(1)(b)
PP lwn. Rahiman Selamat & Kes Yang Lain
(Ahmad Maarop H) [2015] 3 CLJ 92 [HC]

ARTICLE

Legal Network Series Article(s)

1. KEHENDAK SHARIAH DALAM AKTA PERKHIDMATAN
    KEWANGAN ISLAM 2013 (AKTA 759): SATU TINJAUAN
[Read excerpt]
    oleh: MOHAMMAD AZAM HUSSAIN*, RUSNI HASSAN**, AZNAN HASAN*** [2015] 1 LNS(A) xxiii

2. INSURANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK UNDER
    THE FINANCIAL SERVICES ACT 2013*
[Read excerpt]
    by: KRYSTLE LUI SHU LIN [2015] 1 LNS(A) xxix

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Repealing
ACT 766 Netting Of Financial Agreements Act 2015 Not Yet In Force -Nil-
ACT 765 Malaysian Airline System Berhad (Administration) Act 2015 20 February 2015 [PU(B) 37/2015] -Nil-
ACT 764 Finance (No. 2) Act 2014 The Income Tax Act 1967 [Act 53] see s 3; The Petroleum (Income Tax) Act 1967 [Act 543] see s 24; The Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 [Act 169] see s 27 -Nil-
ACT 763 Yayasan Guru Tun Hussein Onn Act 2014 Not Yet In Force -Nil-
ACT 762 Akta Cukai Barang Dan Perkhidmatan 2014 1 Julai 2014 - Bahagian I, II, IV, VI dan xx, ss 10, 11, 17, 18, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, 44, 50, 56, 59, 61, 64, 65, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 160, 163, 183, 184 dan 197, Jadual Pertama dan Jadual Kedua Akta mula berkuat kuasa; 1 April 2015 - Bahagian IX, XIII, xxi and xxv, ss 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 57, 58, 60, 62, 63, 66, 67, 68, 70, 84, 88, 89, 90, 91, 94, 98, 106, 108, 109, 110, 122, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195 dan 196, Jadual Ketiga dan Jadual Keempat Akta mula berkuat kuasa [PU(B) 319/2014] -Nil-

Amending Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1481 Quantity Surveyors (Amendment) Act 2015 Not Yet In Force ACT 487
ACT A1480 Architects (Amendment) Act 2015 Not Yet In Force except for paragraphs 3(d) and (p) and section 23 come into operation on 1 June 2015 ACT 117
ACT A1479 Registration Of Engineers (Amendment) Act 2015 Not Yet In Force ACT 138
ACT A1478 Companies Commission Of Malaysia (Amendment) Act 2015 20 February 2015 [PU(B) 45/2015] except sections 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 ACT 614
ACT A1477 Limited Liability Partnership (Amendment) Act 2015 Not Yet In Force ACT 743

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(A) 60/2015 Ministers Of The Federal Government (No. 2) (Amendment) Order 2015 30 March 2015 27 June 2014 except for subsubparagraph 2(a)(iii) come into operation on 16 May 2013 PU(A) 184/2013
PU(A) 59/2015 Goods And Services Tax (Relief) (Amendment) Order 2015 27 March 2015 30 March 2015 PU(A) 273/2014
PU(A) 58/2015 Goods And Services Tax (Zero-Rated Supply) (Amendment) Order 2015 27 March 2015 30 March 2015 PU(A) 272/2014
PU(A) 57/2015 Goods And Services Tax (Exempt Supply) (Amendment) Order 2015 27 March 2015 30 March 2015 PU(A) 271/2014
PU(A) 56/2015 Goods And Services Tax (Amendment) Regulations 2015 27 March 2015 30 March 2015 except for regulations 3, 4, 5 and 6 come into operation on 1 April 2015 PU(A) 190/2014

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(B) 131/2015 Appointment Of Date Of Coming Into Operation 27 March 2015 30 March 2015 ACT 766
PU(B) 130/2015 Appointment Of Notary Public 27 March 2015 Specified in column (3) of the Schedule ACT 115
PU(B) 129/2015 Notice Regarding The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Third Quarter Of The Year 2014 (No. 2) That Has Been Certified 25 March 2015 24 March 2015 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 128/2015 Notice Regarding The Supplementary Electoral Roll For The Second Quarter Of The Year 2014 (No. 3) That Has Been Certified 24 March 2015 24 March 2015 PU(A) 293/2002
PU(B) 127/2015 Amendments To The List Of Licensees 23 March 2015 24 March 2015 PU(B) 170/2014
[2015] 1 LNS(A) xxiii MALAYSIA

KEHENDAK SHARIAH DALAM AKTA PERKHIDMATAN KEWANGAN ISLAM 2013 (AKTA 759): SATU TINJAUAN

oleh

MOHAMMAD AZAM HUSSAIN*, RUSNI HASSAN**, AZNAN HASAN***


ABSTRAK

Akta Perkhidmatan Kewangan Islam 2013 (Akta 759) adalah merupakan Akta terkini yang diluluskan oleh Parlimen Malaysia untuk mengawalselia sektor perniagaan kewangan Islam di Malaysia. Akta ini mula berkuatkuasa pada 30 Jun 2013 dan telah memansuhkan Akta Bank Islam 1983 (Akta 276) dan Akta Takaful 1984 (Akta 312). Akta ini mengandungi peruntukan-peruntukan bagi pengawalseliaan dan penyeliaan institusi kewangan Islam, sistem pembayaran dan entiti berkaitan yang lain dan pengawasan pasaran wang Islam dan pasaran pertukaran asing Islam untuk mengalakkan kestabilan kewangan dan pematuhan Shariah dan bagi perkara yang berhubungan, berbangkit atau bersampingan dengannya. Objektif utama Akta ini adalah untuk menggalakkan kestabilan kewangan dan pematuhan Shariah. Dalam usaha memastikan aspek kepatuhan Shariah, Akta ini memasukkan peruntukan-peruntukan khusus berkaitan dengan kehendak Shariah untuk dipatuhi sepenuhnya oleh institusi-institusi kewangan Islam. Artikel ini akan meninjau dan membincangkan peruntukan-peruntukan berkaitan serta menjelaskan juga kesan-kesan sekiranya berlaku kemungkiran oleh mana-mana pihak dalam mematuhi peruntukan-peruntukan terbabit.

Katakunci: Akta Perkhidmatan Kewangan Islam; Kepatuhan Shariah; Tadbir Urus Shariah, institusi Kewangan Islam, Undang-undang Islam.

PENDAHULUAN

Tahun 2013 memperlihatkan perubahan lanskap kerangka undang-undang yang mengawalselia sistem kewangan Islam di Malaysia dengan berkuatkuasanya Akta Perkhidmatan Kewangan Islam 2013 (Akta 759) (selepas ini dirujuk sebagai "APKI"). APKI telah memansuhkan Akta Bank Islam 1983 (Akta 276) (selepas ini dirujuk sebagai "ABI") dan Akta Takaful 1984 (Akta 312) (selepas ini dirujuk sebagai "AT"). IFSA yang digubal oleh Parlimen dan mula berkuatkuasa mulai 30 Jun 2013 telah menyediakan kerangka pengawalseliaan aktiviti kewangan Islam oleh institusi-institusi yang berada di bawah penyeliaan Bank Negara Malaysia (selepas ini dirujuk sebagai "BNM").


. . .

* Pensyarah Kanan, Pusat Pengajian Undang-undang, Kolej Undang-undang, Kerajaan & Pengajian Antarabangsa, Universiti Utara Malaysia, hmazam@uum.edu.my.

** Profesor Madya, Kulliyah Undang-undang Ahmad Ibrahim, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia, hrusni@iium.edu.my.

*** Profesor Madya, Kulliyah Undang-undang Ahmad Ibrahim, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia, haznan@iium.edu.my.


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
[2015] 1 LNS(A) xxix MALAYSIA

INSURANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK UNDER
THE FINANCIAL SERVICES ACT 2013*

by

KRYSTLE LUI SHU LIN


IN THIS ARTICLE, KRYSTLE LUI SHU LIN EXAMINES THE IMPACT OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES ACT 2013 ON THE POWERS AND REGULATORY APPROACH OF BANK NEGARA MALAYSIA OVER INSURANCE COMPANIES.

The Insurance Act 1996 ("IA") was largely repealed by the Financial Services Act 2013 ("FSA") which came into force on 30 June 2013, The legal and regulatory framework for the insurance sector under the repealed IA is substantially preserved in the FSA and remains under the regulation of the Central Bank of Malaysia (Bank Negara Malaysia in Malay or "BNM"). Every guideline, direction, circular or notice under the repealed IA, issued and in force immediately before 30 June 2013, shall be deemed to have been issued under a corresponding provision in the FSA or any direction issued under the FSA and remains in full force and effect until amended or revokes.[1]

An overview of the principal aspects applicable to insurance companies under the FSA is as follows:

Under the FSA, only persons carrying on an insurance business will be required to be licensed by the Minister. A licence granted under the IA shall be deemed to be a licence granted under the FSL.[2] The distinction between life business and general business in the IA is preserved in the FSA.

Subsection 16(1) of the FSA prohibits a licensed insurer from carrying on both life and general business. An existing licensed insurer permitted to carry on both life and general business is given five years to comply with subsection 16(1) of the FSA, unless a longer period is specified by the Minister, on the recommendation of BNM, by a written notice to the insurer.[3] Therefore existing composite insurers will have to divest its insurance business within five years from 30 June 2013.


. . .

* Published with kind permission of M/s Shearn Delamore & Co.


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
[2015] 1 CLJ(A) i MALAYSIA

TOWARDS AN EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE JUDGES' EXPECTATION OF LAWYERS

by

YAA TAN SRI DATO' SERI ZULKEFLI AHMAD MAKINUDIN*


Introduction

First and foremost may I take this opportunity to thank the Dean and the academic staffs of Pusat Pengajian Undang-Undang, Kolej Undang-Undang, Kerajaan dan Pengajian Antarabangsa, Universiti Utara Malaysia and the Law Students Society, Universiti Utara Malaysia for inviting me to deliver a lecture on the occasion of this Asian Law Students Association (ALSA) National Conference 2014.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to put on record here that the invitation to deliver a lecture at this conference was first extended to the Right Honourable Chief Justice, Tun Arifin bin Zakaria. However, due to his busy schedule in the discharge of his official duties he could not make it to this conference. The Right Honourable Chief Justice has requested me to replace him and in this regard he had asked me to convey his utmost apology for not being here and he wishes all of us a successful conference.


. . .

* Chief Judge Of Malaya.
Delivered at the Pusat Pengajian Undang-Undang, Kolej Undang-Undang, Kerajaan dan Pengajian Antarabangsa, Universiti Utara Malaysia on 31 October 2014 on the occasion of the Asian Law Students Association (ALSA) National Conference 2014


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
x