Leftenan Kolonel Hafiz bin Haji Sulaiman & 4 Ors v Zulkefli bin Mohamed [2023] 7 AMR 1, CA

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Methamphetamine found in sergeant's urine sample – Commanding officer found sergeant guilty and imposed fine but Chief of Army discharged sergeant from service – Sergeant filed judicial review application to set aside decisions of commanding officer and Chief of Army – High Court quashed said decisions – Whether collection of only one bottle of urine sample valid – Whether non-calling of chemist prejudiced sergeant – Whether there was procedural impropriety – Whether commanding officer's decision ought to be set aside – Whether order of mandamus ought to be granted to direct re-trial by court-martial – Whether applicant's constitutional right to livelihood adversely affected – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 2, 51, 97(9) – Armed Forces (Terms of Service of Regular Forces) Regulations 2013, reg 61(1)(m) – Criminal Procedure Code, s 399, 399(1) – Federal Constitution, Articles 5(1), 8(1) – Penal Code

Armed forces – Service offences and punishments – Disobedience to standing orders – Methamphetamine found in sergeant's urine sample – Commanding officer found sergeant guilty and imposed fine but Chief of Army discharged sergeant from service – High Court quashed both commanding officer's and Chief of Army's decisions – Whether collection of only one bottle of urine sample valid – Whether non-calling of chemist prejudiced sergeant – Whether there was procedural impropriety – Whether commanding officer's decision ought to be set aside – Whether order of mandamus ought to be granted to direct re-trial by court-martial – Whether applicant's constitutional right to livelihood adversely affected – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 2, 51, 97(9) – Armed Forces (Terms of Service of Regular Forces) Regulations 2013, reg 61(1)(m) – Criminal Procedure Code, s 399, 399(1) – Federal Constitution, Articles 5(1), 8(1) – Penal Code

HSC Logistics Sdn Bhd v Teong Tiek Wah [2023] 7 AMR 35, HC

Civil procedure – Injunctions – Fortuna injunction – Company sought to restrain judgment debtor from presenting winding-up petition premised on consent judgment – Whether debt undisputed on account of consent judgment – Whether judgment debtor entitled to enforce debt based on consent judgment – Whether notice under s 466 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA") defective for being excessive and devised to put pressure on company – Whether s 466(1)(a) of the CA places any limit to amount claimed by creditor – Companies Act 2016, s 466, 466(1)(a)

Civil procedure – Judgments and orders – Consent judgment – Company sought to restrain judgment debtor from presenting winding-up petition premised on consent judgment – Whether debt undisputed on account of consent judgment – Whether judgment debtor entitled to enforce debt based on consent judgment – Whether notice under s 466 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA") defective for being excessive and devised to put pressure on company – Whether s 466(1)(a) of the CA places any limit to amount claimed by creditor – Companies Act 2016, s 466, 466(1)(a)

Company law – Winding-up – Petition – Company sought to restrain judgment debtor from presenting winding-up petition premised on consent judgment – Whether debt undisputed on account of consent judgment – Whether judgment debtor entitled to enforce debt based on consent judgment – Whether notice under s 466 of the Companies Act 2016 ("CA") defective for being excessive and devised to put pressure on company – Whether s 466(1)(a) of the CA places any limit to amount claimed by creditor – Companies Act 2016, s 466, 466(1)(a)

Joniston bin Lumai @ Bangkuai v Madius bin Tangau & 2 Ors [2023] 7 AMR 49, HC

Elections – Election petition – Striking out – Result of election claimed to be null and void – Counterclaim to strike out election petition ("EP") – Absence of material facts – Whether presiding officer failed to comply with required provisions of the Election (Conduct of Elections) Regulations 1981 – Whether EP did not comply with rule 4(1)(b) and 4(4)(3) of the Election Petition Rules 1954 – Whether EP and service thereof defective – Election (Conducts of Elections) Regulations 1981, regs 24(1)(b), (c), 25(3)(b), (4), Third Schedule – Election Offences Act 1954, s 32(b) – Election Petition Rules 1954, rule 4(1)(b), (4)(3)

Mohd Azlan bin Sakaran v Public Prosecutor [2023] 7 AMR 71, HC

Criminal procedure – Bail – Application for – Charges under s 302 read with s 34 of the Penal Code – Defence of alibi raised to justify bail – Whether charges were framed based on reasonable grounds – Whether prosecution satisfied requirements of s 388(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code – Whether bail ought to be granted – Criminal Procedure Code, s 388(1) – Penal Code, ss 34, 302

Nazariah binti Abbas v Badan Peguam Malaysia (Malaysian Bar) & 2 Ors [2023] 7 AMR 79, HC

Civil procedure – Consolidation of proceedings – Application for – Two suits having identical causes of action filed before Sessions Court and High Court – Application for consolidation filed under Order 4 r 1 of the Rules of Court 2012 – Sessions Court's jurisdiction to try present suit objected to in view of the Legal Profession Act 1976 – Whether suits ought to be consolidated – Federal Constitution – Legal Profession Act 1976, s 3 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 4 r 1

Yoon Goon How v Aston Villa Sdn Bhd [2023] 7 AMR 87, HC

Contract – Breach – Damages – Employee claimed arrears towards 50% salary deduction made by employer based on oral contract of promise to pay back – No objection or protest by employee since 2012 – Whether oral contract existed – Whether employee estopped by conduct and/or limitation to file claim – Limitation Act 1953, s 6(1)