Dato’ Seri Timor Shah Rafiq v Nautilus Tug & Towage Sdn Bhd (and Another Appeal) [2024] 3 AMR 589, FC

Company law – Derivative action – Cross-appeal – Leave granted to minority shareholder for derivative action against plausible financial misappropriation committed by majority shareholders – Company refused to address valid questions raised – Leave denied to minority shareholder for negligence action against third party company based on inconclusive investigative report – Whether minority shareholder's claim satisfied pre-requisite of "good faith" and "best interest of company" – Whether derivative actions ought to be allowed – Whether courts below erred in law and fact, necessitating appellate intervention – Companies Act 2016, ss 347, 348, 348(4)

Public Prosecutor v Sanderasegaran a/l Nithenanham [2024] 3 AMR 637, FC

Criminal law – Offences affecting the human body – Murder – Appeal against – Conviction of murder under s 302 of the Penal Code ("Code") substituted with culpable homicide under s 304(a) – Trial judge did not specify relevant limb of s 300 for which respondent found guilty of – Whether mandatory to specify which limb of s 300 of the Code that respondent was found guilty of – Whether failure to specify relevant limb of s 300 of the Code fatal to prosecution case – Whether reasonable doubt raised – Abolition of Mandatory Death Sentence Act 2023 – Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g) – Penal Code, ss 300, 300(c), 302, 304(a)

AUM Capital Sdn Bhd v Menara UOA Bangsar Management Corporation [2024] 3 AMR 662, CA

Building and common property – Management corporation – Duties and powers – Disputed facilities located in common property maintained at management corporation's ("MC") own expense – Definition of "common property" – Whether MC should maintain disputed facilities at own expense – Facilities enjoyed by few private parcel owners despite being located on common property – Whether MC could seek reimbursement from said private parcel owners – Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007, s 2 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14A, Order 33 r 2 – Strata Management Act 2013, ss 2, 50, 59, 59(1)(a), (3)(b), 60 – Strata Titles Act 1985, s 4

Civil procedure – Disposal of case on point of law – Appeal against – Disputed facilities located in common property maintained at management corporation's ("MC") own expense – Definition of "common property" – Whether MC should maintain disputed facilities at own expense – Facilities enjoyed by few private parcel owners despite being located on common property – Whether MC could seek reimbursement from said private parcel owners – Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007, s 2 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14A, Order 33 r 2 – Strata Management Act 2013, ss 2, 50, 59, 59(1)(a), (3)(b), 60 – Strata Titles Act 1985, s 4

Othman bin Marzuki v Loyang Ekuiti Sdn Bhd & Anor [2024] 3 AMR 678, HC

Damages (General) – Action for – Forgery – Claim by former director of company for special and exemplary damages against company and its manager for allegedly forging his signature on documents for procurement of project – Former director in charge of project when alleged forgery occurred – Letter of complaint sent by former director to public authority contained allegation of forgery against company – Whether letter defamatory – Whether forgery proved – Whether former director estopped by conduct to raise such claim – Whether parties entitled to damages as claimed – Rules of Court 2012, Order 78 r 3(2)

Tort – Defamation – Libel – Claim for damages – Claim by former director of company for special and exemplary damages against company and its manager for allegedly forging his signature on documents for procurement of project – Former director in charge of project when alleged forgery occurred – Letter of complaint sent by former director to public authority contained allegation of forgery against company – Whether letter defamatory – Whether forgery proved – Whether former director estopped by conduct to raise such claim – Whether parties entitled to damages as claimed – Rules of Court 2012, Order 78 r 3(2)