Skip to main content

All Malaysia Reports (AMR) - Week 13

Content updates

Recently added cases from AMR to Westlaw Asia

See Teow Koon v Kian Joo Can Factory Berhad & 2 Ors [2023] 2 AMR 757, FC

Constitutional law – Courts – Federal Court – Application under rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 ("the Rules") for review and setting aside of previous decision of Federal Court – Whether threshold of review met – Whether rule 137 of the Rules applicable – Whether principles of natural justice breached – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 97(4) – Rules of the Federal Court 1995, rule 137

Associated Pan Malaysia Cement Sdn Bhd v Penghuni-Penghuni Tidak Dikenali Yang Menduduki Tanah Di Pajakan Negeri No. Hakmilik 316004, Lot No. 46497, Mukim Hulu Kinta, Daerah Kinta, Perak & 6 Ors [2023] 2 AMR 772, HC

Civil procedure – Summary proceedings – Possession of land – Land used for quarrying by authorised lessee, allegedly occupied by squatters simpliciter without licence, consent or knowledge of lessee – Monastery built on small portion of land – Whether requirements of Order 89 of the Rules of Court 2012 satisfied – Whether triable issues exist – Rules of Court 2012, Order 89, Order 89 r 3(1)(b), (2)

Hong Leong Bank Berhad v Starfish Holdings Sdn Bhd & Anor [2023] 2 AMR 796, HC

Tort – Negligence – Duty of care – Banker customer relationship – Appeal against order upholding bank's liability under tort of conversion and negligence – Bank debited amounts towards encashment of allegedly forged cheques presented by customer's employee – Whether signature on cheques forged – Whether alleged forgery contributed by negligence of bank – Bills of Exchange Act 1949, ss 73A, 95 – Evidence Act 1950, s 45

MRCB Builders Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Gelanggang Harapan Construction Sdn Bhd) v Liang United Engineering Studio [2023] 2 AMR 820, HC

Civil procedure – Striking out – Statement of claim – Application to strike out and dismiss suit for recovery of damages caused due to breach of duty arising out of contract – Whether simultaneous striking out and dismissal of suit tenable – Whether suit could be struck out under Order 92 r 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 – Whether reasonable cause of action disclosed – Whether suit scandalous, frivolous or vexatious – Whether breach of duty of care occurred – Rules of Court 2012, Order 18 r 19(1), (1)(a), (b), (c), (d), (2), (3), Order 92 r 4

Ong Yew Teik v Yee Teck Fah (practising as an advocate and solicitor at Yee Teck Fah & Co) [2023] 2 AMR 843, HC

Professions – Advocates and solicitors – Disciplinary proceedings – Appeal against Disciplinary Board's ("DB") decision affirming Disciplinary Committee's findings in favour of solicitor accused of professional misconduct – Whether DB's decision liable to be set aside – Legal Profession (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2017, rule 6


By Thomson Reuters Malaysia Editorial Team
Malaysia Editorial Team

Speak to a consultant

Can't find an answer to your question?
Contact our support team.

Request training

Contact our team to arrange training.

Tell us what you think

We'd love to hear what you think
of our products and support.