Skip to main content

All Malaysia Reports (AMR) - Week 12 (Part 1)

/
Content updates

Recently added cases from AMR to Westlaw Asia

Low Ean Nee v Low Cheng Teik & 3 Ors [2023] 2 AMR 541, CA

Company law – Member's rights – Oppression – Appeal against dismissal of oppression action under s 346 of the Companies Act 2016 – Allegation of forged board resolutions for personal gain, mismanagement of company accounts and oppression by diversion of company business and assignment of its trademark to another company at nominal rate – Whether board resolutions forged – Whether company accounts tampered with – Whether oppression committed upon appellant – Companies Act 2016, s 346

Astro Radio Sdn Bhd v Industrial Court of Malaysia & Anor [2023] 2 AMR 558, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Application for certiorari to quash Industrial Court's award – Dismissal of employee on poor performance, without just cause and excuse upheld – Failure to meet expectation under three company's corrective action plans ("CAP") – Whether Industrial Court committed error of law or irrationality – Whether dismissal on poor performance justified – Whether placement of employee on CAPs tainted with mala fide – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s 20

Labour law – Employment – Termination – Dismissal of employee on poor performance, without just cause and excuse – Failure to meet expectation under three company's corrective action plans ("CAP") – Whether Industrial Court committed error of law or irrationality – Whether dismissal on poor performance justified – Whether placement of employee on CAPs tainted with mala fide – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s 20

Hin Maju Sdn Bhd v KS Chin Minerals Sdn Bhd [2023] 2 AMR 582, HC

Contract – Breach – Sale and purchase agreement – Appeal – Reliance upon ancillary oral agreement apart from sale and purchase agreement to claim set-off in recovery proceedings, dismissed – Whether ancillary oral agreement admissible in evidence – Whether appellate error exists – Evidence Act 1950, ss 92, 92(d), 103

Rohas-Euco Industries Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Kastam, Jabatan Kastam DiRaja Malaysia [2023] 2 AMR 600, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Bill of demand under Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 raised – Rejection of input tax credit ("ITC") claim due to late submission of goods and services tax ("GST") returns – Whether ITC claim liable to be rejected solely on late submission of GST returns – Whether issuance of bill of demand illegal – Whether any reviewable error exists – Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, s 41(6) – Goods and Services Tax (Repeal) Act 2018, s 8, 8(1)

Revenue law – Goods and services tax – Judicial review – Bill of demand under Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 raised – Rejection of input tax credit ("ITC") claim due to late submission of goods and services tax ("GST") returns – Whether ITC claim liable to be rejected solely on late submission of GST returns – Whether issuance of bill of demand illegal – Whether any reviewable error exists – Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, s 41(6) – Goods and Services Tax (Repeal) Act 2018, s 8, 8(1)

Tan Chin Yap v Nyanasegar a/l Muniandy & Anor [2023] 2 AMR 610, HC

Civil procedure – Courts – Jurisdiction – High Court order granting leave to commence motor vehicle accident claim on behalf of mentally disabled victim – Order sought to be impeached or annulled on ground of non-compliance with Part X of the Mental Health Act 2001 and Order 76 r 1A of the Rules of Court 2012 – Allegation that High Court order made without jurisdiction by senior assistant registrar – Whether a nullity – Whether High Court order ought to be impeached or annulled – Mental Health Act 2001, ss 52-58, 71, Part X – Rules of Court 2012, Order 76, Order 76 r 1A

Tang Heng Kit v Cindy Ong Pik Yin [2023] 2 AMR 624, HC

Family law – Children – Custody – Sole custody, care and control of children of marriage sought by husband – Breakdown of marriage on ground of wife's alleged adulterous relationship and exhibitionist lifestyle – Whether renders wife unfit mother – Whether husband entitled to sole custody, care and control of all or any of the children – Evidence Act 1950, s 103 – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s 88(3)

By Thomson Reuters Malaysia Editorial Team
Malaysia Editorial Team