Low Cheng Teik & 3 Ors v Low Ean Nee [2024] 7 AMR 481, FC

Company law – Member's rights – Oppression – Appeal against – Court of Appeal allowed majority shareholder's oppression action under s 346 of the Companies Act 2016 ("the Act") premised on unauthorised transfer of company's trademarks to third party ("wrongful act") – Whether wrongful act caused personal loss to shareholder or loss to company – Whether action under s 346 of the Act maintainable – Whether oppression proved – Legal test to determine whether shareholder's complaint actionable by way of oppression action or derivative action – Companies Act 2016, ss 346, 346(1), 347, 348(2)

Pendakwa Raya v Maidin bin Ibnuhashim [2024] 7 AMR 521, CA

Criminal law – Offences affecting the human body – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Appeal against reduction of charge of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of mens rea – Accused caused bodily injuries to nine-month old girl – Whether reduction of charge of murder justified – Whether appealable errors existed – Whether High Court's decision warranted appellate intervention – Penal Code, ss 299, 300(c), 302, 304(a)

Criminal law – Offences affecting the human body – Murder – Appeal against reduction of charge of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of mens rea – Accused caused bodily injuries to nine-month old girl – Whether reduction of charge of murder justified – Whether appealable errors existed – Whether High Court's decision warranted appellate intervention – Penal Code, ss 299, 300(c), 302, 304(a)

KK Lim & Associates (suing as a firm which has been dissolved) v OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad [2024] 7 AMR 531, HC

Evidence – Privilege – Professional communication – Bank instituted action against law firm as one of the defendants in previous fraud suit – Law firm applied for bank's solicitors to be removed, disqualified and/or restrained ("application") – Whether confidential information relied in fraud suit protected by legal privilege under s 126 of the Evidence Act 1950 – Whether application ought to be allowed – Evidence Act 1950, s 126 – Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978, rules 3, 28

Professions – Advocates and solicitors – Disqualification of – Bank instituted action against law firm as one of the defendants in previous fraud suit – Law firm applied for bank's solicitors to be removed, disqualified and/or restrained ("application") – Whether confidential information relied in fraud suit protected by legal privilege under s 126 of the Evidence Act 1950 – Whether application ought to be allowed – Evidence Act 1950, s 126 – Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978, rules 3, 28

Muhammad Ezannie bin Noorazman (menyaman sebagai pentadbir kepada estet Dato’ Hj Noorazman bin Adnan, arwah; dan dalam kapasiti peribadi) v Maria binti Abdullah & 2 Ors [2024] 7 AMR 546, HC

Land law – Indefeasibility – Transfer of title – Fraudulent transfer – Defendants purportedly transferred deceased's property to first defendant ("D1") through forged documents in violation of deceased's bankrupt status – Whether memorandum of transfer ("MOT") was valid for transfer of property from deceased to D1 – Whether transfer of property void owing to deceased's bankrupt status at time of purported execution of MOT – Whether D1 breached fiduciary duty as co-administrator of deceased's estate – Whether second defendant breached duty as solicitor by participating in fraudulent transfer – Whether plaintiff was entitled to damages and could seek assessment of damages – Insolvency Act 1967, s 58 – National Land Code, ss 211, 349

OTL Asia Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai CKE Transport Agency Sdn Bhd) v Lee Yik Chieh & 2 Ors [2024] 7 AMR 561, HC

Civil procedure – Stay – Application – Judgment on liability for tort of breach of confidence –Damages ordered to be assessed – Application by defendants for stay of execution of judgment and stay of assessment of damages proceedings pending appeal to Court of Appeal – Whether stay should be granted – Whether appeal had merits – Whether granting of stay prejudicial to plaintiff

Tay Kuan Tea @ Tay Swee Seng v Phoon Yuh Jiun [2024] 7 AMR 571, HC

Civil procedure – Striking out – Statement of claim – Application for – Suit filed against defendant for alleged losses due to mismanagement of companies and breaches of duties as director – Plaintiff, a former director of said companies claimed to have made substantial financial investments companies – Whether limitation as ground for striking out claim in absence of pleadings in defence could be relied on – Whether losses personally incurred by plaintiff – Whether plaintiff had locus standi to file suit in his personal capacity – Whether suit was vexatious and abuse of court's process – Whether suit liable to be struck out – Companies Act 2016, s 347 – Limitation Act 1953, ss 4, 6