Havi Logistics (M) Sdn Bhd v Pemungut Duti Setem [2025] 2 AMR 349, FC

Revenue law – Stamp duty – Instruments chargeable with duty – Commercial contract – Asset purchase agreement assessed with ad valorem duty under item 32 of the First Schedule to the Stamp Act 1949 ("the Act") – Appeal lodged on ground that only fixed stamp duty payable under item 4 of the First Schedule to the Act – Whether fixed or ad valorem stamp duty payable – Whether fixed assets sold under agreement fell within meaning of "goods" under the Act – Whether Collector of Stamp Duties ought to specify applicable limb of item 32 of First Schedule to Act – Stamp Act 1949, ss 2, 21(1), 38A, 39, First Schedule, items 4, 32, 32(a)

Teoh Kiang Hong v Theow Say Kow @ Teoh Kiang Seng, Henry (and 3 Other Appeals) [2025] 2 AMR 381, FC

Evidence – Admissibility – Recantation of evidence by witness – Disputes among family members on shareholding and ownership of lands in family companies – Allegation of forgery on share sale agreement ("SSA") – Conflicting findings of courts below on recantation of witness's evidence during trial – Withdrawal of witness as plaintiff – Whether there is recognised or established procedure for recantation of evidence in Malaysian law of evidence – Whether failure to adhere to procedure rendered purported recantation unable to be recognised by court – Effects of recantation on credibility of witness – Whether principles in Khoon Chye Hin v PP [1961] 1 MLJ 105 applies to witness who recanted evidence – Solicitor who attested SSA sued as defendant in another suit – Whether solicitor an interested witness – Whether solicitor's evidence credible – Circumstances under which evidence of interested witness may be wholly or partially rejected – Evidence Act 1950

Evidence – Witnesses – Expert witnesses – Disputes among family members on shareholding and ownership of lands in family companies – Two experts, one appointed by private party and another by government gave different evidence – Whether signature on SSA forged – Onus of proof in forgery allegation – Whether government expert's evidence should be preferred solely because his services were not paid for by one of the parties – Evidence Act 1950

Exceljaya Engineering Sdn Bhd v E&L Engineering Sdn Bhd [2025] 2 AMR 428, HC

Contract – Agreements – Revenue sharing agreement – Validity of – Sub-contractor claimed for payment of its share under agreement – Allegation by contractor that agreement void for lack of consideration, coercion and financial pressure – Whether contractor could challenge agreement it drafted – Whether parties bound by agreement – Whether agreement valid

Platinum Prosperity Sdn Bhd v Home Town Steamboat Holding Sdn Bhd [2025] 2 AMR 438, HC

Civil procedure – Appeal – Reinstatement of – Appeal dismissed under Order 55 r 10 of Rules of Court 2012 due to appellant's absence on hearing date – Reinstatement sought on grounds of miscommunication attributable to court staff and solicitor suffering from COVID-19 – Whether sufficient grounds to justify absence – Whether appeal ought to be reinstated – Rules of Court 2012, Order 55 rr 2, 3(4), 10(1), (3)

Tan Hoo Eng v Public Prosecutor [2025] 2 AMR 451, HC

Criminal procedure – Acquittal and discharge – Application for – Charges under s 409 of the Penal Code and ss 4(1)(a) and 87(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing, and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 – Allegation of unfair and biased investigation – Whether preferential treatment given to complainant – Whether investigation tainted by bias – Whether applicant's rights under Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution violated – Whether applicant ought to be acquitted and discharged – Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing, and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, ss 4(1)(a), 87(1) – Federal Constitution, Article 5(1) – Penal Code, s 409