Ho Sue San @ David Ho Sue San v Hovid Bhd & 2 Ors [2024] 7 AMR 125, CA

Company law – Members' rights – Oppression – Minority shareholders – Appellant allegedly discriminated and unfairly prejudiced by third respondent ("R3") utilising majority shareholders' power to oust appellant from management control of first respondent ("R1") – High Court dismissed appellant's suit – Whether alleged conduct tantamount to oppression against appellant – Whether High Court omitted to appreciate appellant's complaint and ensuing cause of action – Whether requisition notice unlawful as proposed resolution unfairly discriminated and otherwise prejudicial to appellant – Whether appellant had legitimate expectation that R3 would not appoint more than two directors to R1's board despite R3 holding majority shares – Whether there was equitable bargain between parties – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Companies Act 2016, ss 311, 346, 346(1), (1)(a), (2)

Lee Kwee Foh Sdn Bhd v Loke Kooi Chuan Properties Sdn Bhd & Anor [2024] 7 AMR 166, CA

Land law – Indefeasibility – Transfer of title – Dispute between parties over two plots of land – Respondent commenced suit seeking to be registered as owner of land ("main action") – Counterclaim by appellant on defeasibility of respondent's title and restitution sought – Appellant pleaded that sale and purchase agreement ("SPA") and memorandum of transfer ("MOT") not executed by its director or liquidator as it was in members voluntary liquidation ("MVL") while also claiming it was never in MVL – Main action withdrawn and High Court dismissed appellant's counterclaim – Whether SPA and MOT were valid and enforceable – Whether High Court correct in dismissing appellant's counterclaim – Whether estoppel barred appellant challenging validity of SPA and MOT given its inconsistent pleadings – Whether appellant's counterclaim barred by limitation and laches – Evidence Act 1950, s 73(1) – National Land Code, s 340, 340(2)(a), (b)

All Kurma Sdn Bhd v Teo Heng Tatt & 9 Ors [2024] 7 AMR 176, HC

Civil procedure – Discovery and inspection of documents – Application for – Action for breach of duties, dishonest assistance and conspiracy to injure – Production of certain classes of documents belonging to company sought by seventh defendant – Whether application ought to be allowed – Whether documents sought discoverable as company no longer relied on them to prove its claim – Whether documents relevant and necessary for either seventh defendant's defence or support of case – Whether application was "fishing expedition" – Whether court's inherent jurisdiction could be invoked to prevent injustice and abuse of process in discovery application – Rules of Court 2012, Order 24, Order 24 rr 3(4), 7(3), Order 92 r 4

Kamaludin bin Kamit & Anor v Fadzilah bte Hassan & Anor (kedua didakwa sebagai rakan kongsi Tetuan Fadzilah Hassan & Co, Peguambela dan Peguamcara) [2024] 7 AMR 188, HC

Evidence – Witnesses – Expert witnesses – Appeal against calling expert witness – Sessions Court allowed application to oppose calling of expert witness to testify on reasonable fees chargeable for non-contentious matters – Opinion evidence of senior practitioner adduced vide witness statement – Objections premised on noncompliance with ss 45 to 51 of the Evidence Act 1950 and Order 40A of the Rules of Court 2012 – Whether mandatory to comply – Whether Sessions Court's decision appealable – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 3 – Evidence Act 1950, ss 45-51 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 40A, Order 40A r 3, Order 92 r 4 – Solicitors' Account (Deposit and Interest) Rules 1990

Megan Alfa Sdn Bhd v Joseph anak Raape & Anor [2024] 7 AMR 201, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Findings by Industrial Court that purported fixed-term contracts not genuine and employee dismissed without just cause or excuse – Employee continued working even after first and second fixed-term contracts expired until termination – Whether findings illegal, irrational or procedurally improper – Whether employee's contract fixed term or permanent – Whether genuine – Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse – Whether application ought to be allowed

Labour law – Employment – Termination – Findings by Industrial Court that purported fixed-term contracts not genuine and employee dismissed without just cause or excuse – Employee continued working even after first and second fixed-term contracts expired until termination – Whether findings illegal, irrational or procedurally improper – Whether employee's contract fixed term or permanent – Whether genuine – Whether dismissal with just cause or excuse – Whether application ought to be allowed

Public Prosecutor v Mahir Affandi bin Mohamad [2024] 7 AMR 215, HC

Dangerous drugs – Trafficking – Possession – Methamphetamine found in house where accused was arrested – Whether prima facie case established against accused – Whether accused had custody, control and knowledge of drugs – Whether element of possession proven – Whether statutory presumption of trafficking successfully established – Whether reasonable doubt raised in prosecution case – Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, ss 54, 55 – Criminal Justice Act 1953, s 3 – Criminal Procedure Code, ss 156, 180(1) – Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss 12(2), 37(da)(xvi), 39A(1)(r), 39B(2) – Evidence Act 1950, ss 114, 132