Back to Top


CLJ Logo CLJ Bulletin, Issue 2013, Vol 42
18 October 2013

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 Of The Week

a) MAHABUILDERS SDN BHD v. PENTADBIR TANAH JOHOR BAHRU & ANOR

b) KUMPULAN WANG SIMPANAN PEKERJA lwn. IGLOO ICE SDN BHD [2013] 2 SMC 22

c) JUDICIAL QUOTES

2. Latest Cases

a) Legal Network Series

b) CLJ 2013 Volume 7 (Part 8)

3. Articles

a) Legal Network Series Article

4. Legislation Highlights

a) Principal Acts

b) Amending Acts

c) PU(A)

d) PU(B)


CASES OF THE WEEK

MAHABUILDERS SDN BHD v. PENTADBIR TANAH JOHOR BAHRU & ANOR
HIGH COURT MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU
GUNALAN MUNIANDY JC
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: 24M-359-11-2012]
3 JULY 2013

LAND LAW: Caveat - Private caveat - Application for extension of - Whether there was binding and enforceable contract to claim title to registered land - Whether plaintiff had requisite interest to be vested with right to enter private caveat - Whether court has power to extend caveat that has been cancelled or removed - Whether caveat had lapsed and no longer had any effect or validity - National Land Code, s. 326(1), (1A), (2) & (3)

LAND LAW: Caveat - Private caveat - Application for extension of - Court's power to extend caveat under National Land Code - Whether limited to caveat that is in force - Whether Registrar of Titles had rightly acted within his powers in accordance with provisions of s. 326(1), (1A) & (3) National Land Code to remove caveat - Whether caveat had lapsed and no longer had any effect or validity

KUMPULAN WANG SIMPANAN PEKERJA lwn. IGLOO ICE SDN BHD [2013] 2 SMC 22
MAHKAMAH MAJISTRET, BUKIT MERTAJAM
MOHD AZHAR HAMZAH MJ
[SAMAN NO: 87-1174-2011]
16 JUN 2012

UNDANG-UNDANG BURUH: Caruman - Wang simpanan pekerja - Kegagalan majikan memasukkan caruman - Percanggahan slip-slip gaji - Kesahihan dan kebolehterimaan - Status elaun dan komisyen - Sama ada tersenarai dalam takrif upah - Sama ada diwajibkan potongan caruman - Akta Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja 1991, s. 43(2)

KETERANGAN: Keterangan bercanggah - Caruman - Wang simpanan pekerja - Kegagalan majikan membuat caruman upah pekerja - Keterangan dokumentar - Percanggahan slip-slip gaji - Kesahihan dan kebolehterimaan - Sama ada slip gaji yang dikemukakan majikan suatu fikiran terkemudian - Akta Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja 1991, s. 43(2)

JUDICIAL QUOTES

PP v. SHAHRUL AZUWAN ADANAN & ANOR [2013] 2 CLJ 686

[2] Issue: Whether the Magistrate was right in construing the proviso to s. 44(2) of the Animals Act 1953 as giving her no authority to pass any sentence of imprisonment without first giving the respondents, who stood charged under s. 44(1)(d) of the Act, the option of paying a fine.

“With due respect to the learned Magistrate she had misconstrued the proviso. The proviso only applies to owners of animals and not to others and certainly not to the respondents who were in the business of looking after other people’s cats for a fee. They cannot take cover behind the proviso to avoid custodial sentence. Thus, they can be sentenced to jail without first giving them the option of paying a fine. From her grounds of sentencing, it appears that the learned Magistrate was minded to pass imprisonment sentence but due to her erroneous interpretation of the proviso to s. 44(2) of the Act, she decided against passing such sentence as she felt constrained by law from doing so.” – per Abdul Rahman Sebli J in PP v. Shahrul Azuwan Adanan & Anor [2013] 2 CLJ 686.

For more Judicial Quotes, please login and view under "References" or subscribe to CLJLaw.

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2012] 1 LNS 332

DANG CHOOI PING v. LIM ENG KOK

FAMILY LAW: Children - Custody - Whether welfare and best interests of children would be safeguarded if children allowed to continue living with defendant/father - Whether wrong for the Court to force them to live with their mother - Whether presumption in s. 88(3) of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 rebutted - Whether plaintiff an unfit parent to have custody, care and control of the children - Whether defendant more suitable parent to have custody, care and control of the children - Whether detrimental to welfare of the children to transfer them from defendant's interim custody to plaintiff

[2012] 1 LNS 335

DOLOMITE READYMIXED CONCRETE SDN BHD v. ZALAM CORPORATION SDN BHD & ORS

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Trial - Submission of no case to answer - Defendants elected to make submission of "no case to answer" to plaintiff's claim at close of plaintiff's case - Whether defendants entitled to call for evidence - Whether principle that defendants' case would stand and fall based on the strength of the submissions did not extend to a situation where there was a counterclaim by defendants against plaintiff - Whether counterclaim was a separate and distinct claim and unconnected to plaintiff's invoices - Whether defendant should be given opportunity to adduce evidence to prove defendants' counterclaim against plaintiff but not to adduce evidence to prove defendants' defence against plaintiff's case

EVIDENCE: Adverse inference - Failure to produce material document - 1st defendant's statements of accounts with plaintiff - Whether a crucial document to prove payments made by defendants pertaining to all transactions between parties - Whether attracted presumption of adverse inference - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g)

[2012] 1 LNS 351

RE: LEE BUCK GEE; EX-PARTE: CIMB BANK BERHAD

BANKRUPTCY: Notice - Setting aside - Appeal against dismissal of judgment debtor's application to set aside bankruptcy notice - Whether judgment creditor had the requisite locus standi - Whether present judgment creditor substituted original judgment creditor under the vesting orders - Whether judgment debtor was misled or embarrassed by service of the bankruptcy

BANKRUPTCY: Act of bankruptcy - Date of commission - Appeal against date taken as the act of bankruptcy by the Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) - Whether ground raised by judgment debtor fell outside rule 95 of the Bankruptcy Rules 1969 - Judgment Debtor did not file an affidavit in opposition under Rule 95 - Whether act of bankruptcy must be taken as occurring 7 days after service of the bankruptcy notice - Whether wrong to take date of act of bankruptcy as occurring at the date of SAR'S decision

[2012] 1 LNS 352

BARTER FORTUNE SDN BHD v. MAJURAMA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judgments and orders - Consent judgment - Application for setting aside - Allegations of mutual common mistake, material and fundamental unilateral mistake, no consensus ad idem, unjust enrichment and fraud - Whether grounds to set aside consent judgment

CONTRACT: Mistake - Mutual common mistake and material and fundamental unilateral mistake - Whether plaintiff through its director (PW1) and through its counsel knew of the summary judgment and that CIMB would have to pay if there was no appeal - Whether implausible for plaintiff to contend they were unaware CIMB had paid the RM315k claim when it was negotiating with defendant - Whether there was a mistake and consequently, consensus ad idem

CONTRACT: Fraud - Whether there was active concealment or act of deceit by defendant's Chief Financial Controller (DW1) - Whether PW1 and/or his counsel knew of the summary judgment obtained against CIMB and that CIMB would have to pay if there was no appeal - Whether DW1's assumption that they knew was farfetched - Whether DW1 obliged to inform PW1 that CIMB had paid the RM315k claim in the course of discussions for settlement - Whether DW1's silence a fraudulent act

CONTRACT: Unjust enrichment - Payment made to another where it was inequitable for recipient to keep it - Whether there was unjust enrichment

[2012] 1 LNS 361

RESAD DILLAH v. PP

CRIMINAL LAW: Anti Corruption Act 1997 - s. 11(a) - Obtaining gratification - Whether appellant received trap money of RM5,500 which money was recovered from him - Whether money was planted by PW16, PW17 and ACA officers - Whether prosecution was obliged to prove whether accused solicited or demanded for gratification - Whether an ingredient of offence under the Anti Corruption Act 1997, s. 11(a)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Prosecution - Prosecution's case - Whether there were discrepancies in evidence of prosecution's witnesses - Whether contradictions minor and did not defeat prosecution's case or negate elements of the offence

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Defence - Denial - Whether appellant's defence was one of pure denial - Whether insufficient to discharge burden of proof under s. 42(1) of the Anti Corruption Act 1997

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeal - Appeal against sentencing - Whether sentenced passed by Sessions Court judge in line with sentencing principles - Whether Sessions Court judge considered principles of retribution, deterrence and reformation in the assessment of sentence as well as mitigating factors - Whether Sessions Court judge passed sentence based on the proven facts and circumstances - Whether any reason to interfere with Sessions Court judge's decision

EVIDENCE: Adverse inference - Failure of prosecution to call witness - Whether prejudiced appellant - Whether fatal to prosecution's case - Whether prosecution able to prove its case against appellant even without Mr. Tee and the mysterious runner

CLJ 2013 Volume 7 (Part 8)

ARTICLE

Transforming Malaysia - The Fight Against Corruption and the Role of the Courts in the Expedition of Corruption Trials
by Justice Tan Sri Dato' Seri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin [2013] 7 CLJ i

CASES

COURT

FEDERAL COURT

National Union Of Bank Employees v. Director General Of Trade Unions & Anor
Arifin Zakaria CJ, Raus Sharif PCA, Abdull Hamid Embong, Hasan Lah, Jeffrey Tan FCJJ
(Administrative Law - Judicial review proceedings - Application for extension of time ) [2013] 7 CLJ 957 [FC]

COURT OF APPEAL

Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA
(Contract - Breach - Compensation - Repudiatory breach - Principles in interpretation of terms) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Dr Mohd Adnan Sulaiman & Anor v. Kumpulan Perubatan (Johor) Sdn Bhd
Abdul Rahman Sebli J
(Contract - Joint venture agreement - Fiduciary relationship - Conflict of interest - Damages) [2013] 7 CLJ 1032 [HC]

Mahabuilders Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Johor Bahru & Anor
Gunalan Muniandy JC
(Land Law - Private caveat - Extension - Registrar of Titles - National Land Code, s. 326) [2013] 7 CLJ 1059 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Judicial review - Judicial review proceedings - Delay in filing Form 111B - Application for extension of time - Whether court has discretion to extend time - Cause papers served on parties - Whether filing of Form 111B was mere formality - Whether caused prejudice to parties - Rules of the High Court 1980, O. 3 r. 5, O. 53 r. 4(1)
National Union Of Bank Employees v. Director General Of Trade Unions & Anor
(Arifin Zakaria CJ, Raus Sharif PCA, Abdull Hamid Embong, Hasan Lah, Jeffrey Tan FCJJ) [2013] 7 CLJ 957 [FC]

CONTRACT

Breach - Compensation - Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act - Whether purchaser in breach of sale and purchase agreement may nevertheless claim costs of improvements done on land from vendor - Whether purchaser liable to pay vendor for use and occupation of land - Unjust enrichment - Pre-conditions for right of compensation - Contracts Act 1950, s. 71
Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
(Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

Breach - Damages - Joint venture agreement - Loss of future profits - Whether proved - Whether losses suffered within reasonable contemplation of parties - Expert evidence - Whether rebutted
Dr Mohd Adnan Sulaiman & Anor v. Kumpulan Perubatan (Johor) Sdn Bhd
(Abdul Rahman Sebli J) [2013] 7 CLJ 1032 [HC]

Breach - Remedies - Sale and purchase agreement - Agreement terminated due to purchaser's failure to pay balance purchase price - Purchaser let into possession of land before completion - Whether vendor entitled to terminate agreement, forfeit deposit and recover vacant possession of land - Whether purchaser liable to pay vendor for use and occupation of land
Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
(Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

Breach - Repudiatory breach - Effect of repudiatory breach - Whether innocent party entitled to treat contract as terminated - Test for determining whether repudiatory breach accepted by innocent party
Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
(Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

Breach - Sale and purchase agreement - Purchaser failing to pay balance purchase price within completion date - Time of essence - Whether repudiatory breach - Whether vendor entitled to terminate agreement, forfeit deposit and recover vacant possession of land - Purchaser let into possession of land before completion - Whether purchaser liable to pay vendor for use and occupation of land - Whether purchaser may claim cost of improvements done on land from vendor - Contracts Act 1950, s. 71
Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
(Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

Interpretation - Principles in interpretation of terms - Reasonableness and commerciality
Dream Property Sdn Bhd v. Atlas Housing Sdn Bhd
(Abu Samah Nordin, Anantham Kasinather, Mohamad Ariff Yusof JJCA) [2013] 7 CLJ 969 [CA]

Joint venture - Joint venture agreement - Breach of - Relationship of parties - Whether a fiduciary relationship existed - Whether parties contractually obligated to ensure joint venture objective prospered - Setting up of entity to rival business of joint venture - Whether fundamentally breached joint venture agreement - Conflict of interest - Loss of future profits - Whether proved
Dr Mohd Adnan Sulaiman & Anor v. Kumpulan Perubatan (Johor) Sdn Bhd
(Abdul Rahman Sebli J) [2013] 7 CLJ 1032 [HC]

LAND LAW

Caveat - Private caveat - Application for extension of - Court's power to extend caveat under National Land Code - Whether limited to caveat that is in force - Whether Registrar of Titles had rightly acted within his powers in accordance with provisions of s. 326(1), (1A) & (3) National Land Code to remove caveat - Whether caveat had lapsed and no longer had any effect or validity
Mahabuilders Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Johor Bahru & Anor
(Gunalan Muniandy JC) [2013] 7 CLJ 1059 [HC]

Caveat - Private caveat - Application for extension of - Whether there was binding and enforceable contract to claim title to registered land - Whether plaintiff had requisite interest to be vested with right to enter private caveat - Whether court has power to extend caveat that has been cancelled or removed - Whether caveat had lapsed and no longer had any effect or validity - National Land Code, s. 326(1), (1A), (2) & (3)
Mahabuilders Sdn Bhd v. Pentadbir Tanah Johor Bahru & Anor
(Gunalan Muniandy JC) [2013] 7 CLJ 1059 [HC]

ARTICLE

Legal Network Series Article

1. DISMISSALS UNDER MALAYSIAN EMPLOYMENT - A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE [Read excerpt]
    by: GURU DHILLON* [2013] 1 LNS(A) lxviii

2. BEING DOUBLY MARGINALISED - THE PLIGHT OF THE ROHINGYA IN MALAYSIA [Read excerpt]
    by: TAMARA JOAN DURAISINGAM* & DR. ROHAIDA NORDIN** [2013] 1 LNS(A) lxix

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Repealing
ACT 759 Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 30 June 2013 [PU(B) 277/2013] - except para(s) 1 to 10 of Schedule 9 and para(s) 13 to 19 of Schedule 9 -Nil-
ACT 758 Financial Services Act 2013 30 June 2013 [PU(B) 276/2013] - except s 129 and Schedule 9 -Nil-
ACT 757 Strata Management Act 2013 Not Yet In Force -Nil-
ACT 756 Traditional And Complementary Medicine Act 2013 Not Yet In Force -Nil-
ACT 755 Finance Act 2013 See s 3 for the Income Tax Act; s 41 for the Stamp Act; s 47 for the Petroleum (Income Tax) Act and s 55 for the Real Property Gains Tax Act -Nil-

Amending Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1453 Supplementary Supply (2012) Act 2013 7 September 2013
ACT A1452 Animals (Amendment) Act 2013 20 August 2013 ACT 647
ACT A1451 Perbadanan Kemajuan Filem Nasional Malaysia (Amendment) Act 2013 1 April 2013 [PU(B) 89/2013] ACT 244
ACT A1450 Strata Titles (Amendment) Act 2013 Not Yet In Force ACT 318
ACT A1449 Industrial Designs (Amendment) Act 2013 1 July 2013 [PU(B) 86/2013] ACT 552

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(A) 312/2013 Renewable Energy (Feed-In Approval And Feed-In Tariff Rate) (Amendment) (No. 2) Rules 2013 11 October 2013 28 March 2013 ACT 725
PU(A) 311/2013 Medical (Amendment Of Second Schedule) (No. 3) Order 2013 11 October 2013 12 October 2013 ACT 50
PU(A) 310/2013 Occupational Safety And Health (Classification, Labelling And Safety Data Sheet Of Hazardous Chemicals) Regulations 2013 11 October 2013 12 October 2013 ACT 514
PU(A) 309/2013 Federal Roads (Private Management) (Collection Of Tolls) (South Klang Valley Expressway) Order 2013 10 October 2013 1 November 2013 ACT 306
PU(A) 308/2013 Labour (Part-Time Employees) (Sarawak) Rules 2013 9 October 2013 10 October 2013 SWK. CAP. 76

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(B) 403/2013 Notification Of Registration Of New Plant Variety And Grant Of Breeder'S Right 16 October 2013 17 October 2013 ACT 634
PU(B) 402/2013 Results Of Contested Election And Statements Of The Poll After The Official Addition Of Votes Parliamentary Constituencies For The State Of Negeri Sembilan - Corrigendum 10 October 2013 11 October 2013 ACT 19
PU(B) 401/2013 Notification Of Establishment Of Welfare Home 10 October 2013 11 October 2013 ACT 183
PU(B) 400/2013 Reservation Of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 21564 Mukim Setapak 9 October 2013 10 October 2013 ACT 56/1965
PU(B) 399/2013 Notice Of Proposed Revocation Of Reservation Of Land For Public Purpose For Lot 27539 Mukim Setapak 8 October 2013 9 October 2013 ACT 56/1965
[2013] 1 LNS(A) lxviii MALAYSIA

DISMISSALS UNDER MALAYSIAN EMPLOYMENT - A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

by

GURU DHILLON*


ABSTRACT

From the outset, the purpose of this paper is to provide an explanatory guideline to the worker and the employer on what to expect when a dismissal occurs, what are the procedures that need to be adhered to and what are the common types of dismissal. From a worker’s perspective, being dismissed from employment is an extremely distressing and upsetting experience to say the least. It inflicts severe economic hardships upon the said worker. It is a given that he would be deprived of his major source of livelihood; it is also likely that he would suffer nonpecuniary damages such as injury to feelings and mental distress, serious trauma from being dismissed, and basically embarrassment and humiliation at being labeled “unemployed”. In general, there are three (3) branches of dismissal namely summary dismissal, constructive dismissal, and forced resignation. From the employer’s point of view, to conduct a dismissal wrongly may bring about serious ramifications to his business; be it from the ethical or financial point of view. As such, the author has analysed the various types of dismissal and relevant procedures to enlighten all those who may encounter problems pertaining to this area of employment law.

Dismissal laws in Malaysia

Dismissal Procedure

In Malaysia, the dismissal issues are governed by the Employment Act 1955 (hereinafter referred to as EA 1955) and the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (hereinafter referred to as IRA 1967). Generally, the requirements for a lawful dismissal are a valid substantive justification followed by a fair procedure. The justified reasons for dismissals normally are misconduct, poor performance or negligence. Only after the grounds of the particular dismissal has been determined will the procedure take place which would eventually lead to the lawful dismissal of an employee. The dismissal procedure varies with the grounds of the dismissal. This section will highlight strengths and weaknesses of the dismissal procedure in Malaysia.


. . .

* Senior Lecturer In Law, Multimedia University


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
[2013] 1 LNS(A) lxix MALAYSIA

BEING DOUBLY MARGINALISED - THE PLIGHT OF THE ROHINGYA IN MALAYSIA

by

TAMARA JOAN DURAISINGAM*

DR. ROHAIDA NORDIN**


INTRODUCTION

The term ‘refugee’ is considered as a ‘term of art’ by scholars (Goodwin- Gill, 2007) but rarely used by the authorities as a bundle of rights either via international treaty law or customary international law accompanies this status. Hence the terms boat-people, immigrants or asylum seekers are used instead. Protection for refugees however is not a new phenomenon for the Malaysian authorities. Even though Malaysia is not party to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (The Refugees Convention) and does not recognize refugees as deserving of rights, yet Malaysia has hosted some 250,000 Vietnamese refugees between the years 1975 till 1996, witnessed the arrival of 50,000 Filipino Muslims from Mindanao between the 70s and 80s and granted refuge to a number of refugees from Bosnia in the 90s (Khoo (compilation), 2010).

The Rohingya community from Myanmar began arriving to Malaysia in the 1990s and there were close to 16,000 in Malaysia registered with the UNHCR by mid-2009 (Khoo, 2010). Malaysia is a relatively safe destination for this Muslim community and they arrive with the hope that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Kuala Lumpur will be able to assist them. Their reason for flight from Myanmar however is somewhat compelling.


. . .

* (PhD candidate, National University of Malaya, (UKM)).

** (Senior Lecturer in Law, UKM).


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