Badan Peguam Malaysia v Yang Berhormat Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Tan Sri Dato' Haji Mahiaddin bin Mohd Yasin & Anor [2024] 5 AMR 457, FC

Constitutional law – Courts – Federal Court – Appeal against – Court of Appeal affirmed High Court's refusal to refer questions to Federal Court under Article 128 of the Federal Constitution ("FC") and s 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 ("the CJA") – Questions raised regarding constitutionality of Article 150 of the FC – Application filed for leave to appeal against Court of Appeal's decision – Whether High Court justified in refusing to refer questions to Federal Court – Whether High Court has discretion to deal with inconsistency challenges of constitutional provisions – Whether Federal Court ought to decide questions referred without remitting them to High Court – Whether there was prima facie case for success in appeal – Whether threshold for grant of leave under s 96 of the CJA fulfilled – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss 81, 84, 84(1), 96 – Federal Constitution, Articles 4(3), (4), 128, 128(1), (2), 150

Attorney General of Malaysia v Sabah Law Society (State Government of Sabah – Intervener) [2024] 5 AMR 472, CA

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Appeal – High Court granted Sabah Law Society ("SLS") leave to commence judicial review with respect to special grant for Sabah under Article 112C and section 2 of Part IV of the Tenth Schedule to the Federal Constitution – Federal government allegedly failed to conduct review between 1974 and 2021 and pay Sabah's 40% entitlement for annual payments of grants under The Federal Constitution (Review of the Special Grant under Article 112D) (State of Sabah) Order 2022 ("Review Order 2022") – Whether SLS has locus standi to file application – Whether "adversely affected" test for locus standi fulfilled – Whether Review Order 2022 is "decision" within meaning of Order 53 r 2(4) of the Rules of Court 2012 – Whether subject matter of application justiciable – Whether application is a public interest litigation – Federal Constitution, Articles 112C, 112D, Tenth Schedule, Part IV, section 2 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 53, Order 53 r 2(4) – The Federal Constitution (Review of the Special Grant under Article 112D) (State of Sabah) Order 2022

Mohamed Fayadh bin Abdul Gaffor & 2 Ors v Liberty Insurance Berhad (formerly known as Uni Asia General Insurance Berhad) [2024] 5 AMR 493, CA

Civil procedure – Declaratory reliefs – Appeal against – Two suits filed in Sessions Court regarding motor vehicle accident – First suit discontinued after insured filed defence – High Court granted declaration that insurer not liable to pay any judgment sum which may be obtained against insured in second suit – Decision based on claimant's non-compliance of s 96(2)(a) of the Road Transport Act 1987 ("the RTA") to serve fresh notice of second suit on insurer – Whether insurer had "notice" of proceedings in second suit – Whether non-compliance with s 96(2)(a) of the RTA could solely disqualify claimant of judgment sum obtained in second suit – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967, s 17A – Road Transport Act 1987, ss 96(1), (2)(a), 118(1), (1)(a)-(d)

Insurance – Liability – Claim for judgment sum – Appeal against – Two suits filed in Sessions Court regarding motor vehicle accident – First suit discontinued after insured filed defence – High Court granted declaration that insurer not liable to pay any judgment sum which may be obtained against insured in second suit – Decision based on claimant's non-compliance of s 96(2)(a) of the Road Transport Act 1987 ("the RTA") to serve fresh notice of second suit on insurer – Whether insurer had "notice" of proceedings in second suit – Whether non-compliance with s 96(2)(a) of the RTA could solely disqualify claimant of judgment sum obtained in second suit – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Interpretation Acts 1948 and 1967, s 17A – Road Transport Act 1987, ss 96(1), (2)(a) , 118(1), (1)(a)-(d)

Izwan bin Abu Bakar v Mej Mohd Hafes bin Haji Rosli (Pegawai Pemerintah 7 Workshop Briged Kem Tebrau, Johor Bharu, Johor) & 3 Ors [2024] 5 AMR 524, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Commanding officer found applicant guilty of offence of being absent from work without leave – Maximum punishment of 90 days' detention, reduction in rank and discharge from service imposed without considering mitigation – Whether non-consideration of mitigation plea amounts to procedural unfairness – Whether punishment proportionate to offence committed – Whether decision ought to be quashed – Armed Forces (Summary Jurisdiction) Regulations 1976, reg 16, Third Schedule – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 55(a), 87 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 53

Profusion Petroleum Sdn Bhd v Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Dalam Negeri dan Kos Sara Hidup & Anor [2024] 5 AMR 535, HC

Damages (General) – Wrongful arrest – Action for – Company's director and employees suspected of being involved in misappropriation of subsidised diesel fuel – Arrested for less than 24 hours – Scheduled controlled goods licence suspended for previous offence ("suspension notice") – Whether wrongful arrest and wrongful seizure of goods proved – Whether tort of misfeasance in public office or abuse of power established against defendants – Whether government vicariously liable – Whether plaintiff entitled to challenge suspension notice – Control of Supplies Act 1961, ss 10(1), 11, 12 – Criminal Procedure Code, s 23(1)(a) – Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g) – Rules of Court 2012, Order 53 r 2(4)

Tort – Wrongful arrest – Arrest without warrant – Company's director and employees suspected of being involved in misappropriation of subsidised diesel fuel – Arrested for less than 24 hours – Scheduled controlled goods licence suspended for previous offence ("suspension notice") – Whether wrongful arrest and wrongful seizure of goods proved – Whether tort of misfeasance in public office or abuse of power established against defendants – Whether government vicariously liable – Whether plaintiff entitled to challenge suspension notice – Control of Supplies Act 1961, ss 10(1), 11, 12 – Criminal Procedure Code, s 23(1)(a) – Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g) – Rules of Court 2012, Order 53 r 2(4)