Dato’ Dr Abd Wahab bin Abd Ghani v Mohd Rashid bin Mohd Noor & 2 Ors (and Another Appeal) [2025] 4 AMR 237, CA

Contract – Agreements – Settlement agreement – Disputes regarding settlement sum arising from medical negligence action – Construction and interpretation of the words "to the Plaintiff" in settlement agreement – Whether words also referred to plaintiff's solicitors – Whether settlement sum to be paid to plaintiff directly or his solicitors – Whether Bank Negara's Claims Settlement Practices (Consolidated) legally binding – Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 – Exchange Control Act 1953 – Financial Services Act 2013 – Insurance Act 1996, ss 201, 234(1)(d), (9), (10), 272(b) – Payment Systems Act 2003

Professions – Advocates and solicitors – Solicitor-client costs – Disputes regarding settlement sum arising from medical negligence action – Whether settlement sum to be paid to plaintiff directly or his solicitors – Whether principle of solicitor's lien on costs owed applicable – Whether solicitors had possessory right over cheque – Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 – Exchange Control Act 1953 – Financial Services Act 2013 – Insurance Act 1996, ss 201, 234(1)(d), (9), (10), 272(b) – Payment Systems Act 2003

Eastern Pacific Industrial Corporation Berhad v AD Metal Trading & Transport Sdn Bhd (and Another Appeal) [2025] 4 AMR 275, CA

Tort – Trespass of goods – Damages – Claim for – Detention of plaintiff's lorries by auxiliary police – Auxiliary police wore uniforms adorned with badges bearing defendant's name and acronym – Whether claim for damages should be allowed – Whether plaintiff entitled to all damages claimed including loss of profit and costs and expenses expended – Whether defendant liable – Whether appellate intervention warranted

Kasugi Prima Sdn Bhd v Cobrain Holdings Sdn Bhd (and Another Appeal) [2025] 4 AMR 288, CA

Arbitration – Award – Enforcement of – Appeal against – Dismissal of application to set aside award and grant of application to enforce the same – Arbitrator drew own expertise to decide and conclude award – Whether arbitrator improperly or prematurely invoked authority under s 21(3)(b) of Arbitration Act 2005 ("AA") – Whether s 21(3)(b) of the AA invocable purely as to procedural matters – Whether arbitrator breached rules of natural justice – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Arbitration Act 2005, s 21(3), (3)(b) – Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012

Arbitration – Conduct of arbitral proceedings – Powers of arbitrator – Appeal against – Dismissal of application to set aside award and grant of application to enforce the same – Arbitrator drew own expertise to decide and conclude award – Whether arbitrator improperly or prematurely invoked authority under s 21(3)(b) of Arbitration Act 2005 ("AA") – Whether s 21(3)(b) of the AA invocable purely as to procedural matters – Whether arbitrator breached rules of natural justice – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Arbitration Act 2005, s 21(3), (3)(b) – Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012

Chong Teck Choy & Anor v Bina-Safee Sdn Bhd [2025] 4 AMR 315, HC

Intellectual property – Industrial designs – Infringement – Whether industrial design capable of registration – Whether criteria as "new" under the Industrial Designs Act 1996 met – Whether infringed – Whether rectification of industrial design required under law – Industrial Designs Act 1996, ss 3, 12, 24

Mazlan bin Juwaleh v Public Prosecutor [2025] 4 AMR 321, HC

Criminal procedure – Sentencing – Appeal against – Sentence of 10 years' imprisonment and four strokes of whipping – Accused had three previous convictions under s 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 – Whether sentence imposed manifestly excessive – Whether previous conviction warranted enhanced sentence – Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss 12(2), 15(1)(a), 39C(1), (1)(b), (2)

Onnet Consulting Sdn Bhd & Anor v AM PM Pharmacy Sdn Bhd & 2 Ors [2025] 4 AMR 326, HC

Contract – Breach – Claim for injunctions and damages – Software allegedly migrated to third party server without plaintiffs' permission – Migration done by contractor appointed by plaintiff – Whether copyright of software open source or proprietary software belonging to plaintiffs – Whether copyright infringed – Burden of proof in proving copyright existed – Whether defendants owed plaintiff duty of care – Whether duty of care breached – Whether duty of confidentiality existed between parties – Copyright Act 1987, s 48 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 18 rr 7(1), 12(1)

Intellectual property – Copyright – Infringement of – Claim for injunctions and damages – Software allegedly migrated to third party server without plaintiffs' permission – Migration done by contractor appointed by plaintiff – Whether copyright of software open source or proprietary software belonging to plaintiffs – Whether copyright infringed – Burden of proof in proving copyright existed – Whether defendants owed plaintiff duty of care – Whether duty of care breached – Whether duty of confidentiality existed between parties – Copyright Act 1987, s 48 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 18 rr 7(1), 12(1)