Skip to main content

All Malaysia Reports (AMR) - Week 6(2)

Content updates

Recently added cases from AMR to Westlaw Asia

Hemraj & Co Sdn Bhd v Tenaga Nasional Berhad [2023] 1 AMR 725, FC

Tort – Negligence – Non-delegable duty – Public utility company's underground cable damaged due to negligence of independent contractors carrying out routine residential construction work hired by homeowner – Whether homeowner owed non-delegable duty of care for negligence of independent contractors – Whether special relationship existed between homeowner and company to impose non-delegable duty of care on homeowner – Whether non-delegable duty of care ought to be specifically pleaded – Electricity Supply Act 1990, s 37(12)(a), (b)

KNM Process Systems Sdn Bhd v CECA Gold Company Limited & Anor [2023] 1 AMR 744, CA

Civil procedure – Injunctions – Interim injunctions – Appeal – High Court allowed bank guarantee to be called upon for alleged breach of contract governed by laws of Singapore – Refuge sought under s 7 of the Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020 ("Act 829") for non-performance of contract – Whether declaratory relief could be granted under s 11 of the Arbitration Act 2005 – Whether bank, being non-party to contract, can be restrained – Whether action of calling upon bank guarantee unconscionable and unreasonable – Whether protection under s 7 of Act 829 applicable – Whether Malaysian law provision applicable extra-territorially and liable to be ignored when contract governed by Singapore laws – Applicable law in event of conflict– Arbitration Act 2005, s 11 – Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020, s 7

Mohamad Fadhilah bin Bantut v Public Prosecutor (and Another Appeal) [2023] 1 AMR 761, HC

Dangerous drugs – Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Conviction for offence of self-administration of dangerous drugs under s 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentence of seven years' imprisonment and two years' supervision – One bottle of urine sample admitted in evidence instead of two bottles as required by IGSO F103 guidelines – Whether conviction and sentence safe – Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, s 15(1)(a) – Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983, s 2 – Police Act 1967, s 97

Safwa Global Builders (M) Sdn Bhd & 2 Ors v Hanson Quarry Products Sdn Bhd [2023] 1 AMR 781, HC

Civil procedure – Summary judgment – Application for – Appeal against decision allowing summary judgment – Supplier and buyer entered into credit terms wherein directors of company executed letter of guarantee and indemnity, alleged to be discharged due to revised credit limit, non-issuance of prior demand and one director's resignation – Buyer admitted outstanding dues in unprivileged settlement communications – Whether there were triable issues – Whether letter of guarantee and indemnity of continuous nature – Whether director of company discharged of liability due to resignation and no prior demand – Whether settlement communication admissible – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14 r 1

YYM (memohon untuk pihak mereka sendiri dan sebagai wakil litigasi XXXXXXX, seorang kanak-kanak) v Ketua Pengarah Pendaftaran Negara & 2 Ors [2023] 1 AMR 796, HC

Constitutional law – Citizenship – Citizenship by operation of law – Abandoned child adopted by Malaysian citizen – Identity of biological parents of child unknown – Citizenship status of child in birth certificate stated as "non-citizen" – Whether child entitled to be declared citizen of Malaysia – Adoption Act 1952, s 25A, 25A(5) – Federal Constitution, Article 14(1)(b), Second Schedule, section 1(a) of Part II, section 19B of Part III – Rules of Court 2012, Order 28 rr 4(2), (3), (4), 8(1)

Zakri Afandi bin Ismail v Ikwan Hafiz bin Jamaludin & Anor (and Another Suit) [2023] 1 AMR 816, HC

Civil procedure – Injunctions – Interim injunction – Company's director challenged his removal and transfer of subject shares pending which, injunction applications filed to restrain alleged transferee to deal with subject shares – Whether there were bona fide serious issues to be tried – Whether balance of convenience lies in favour of applicant – Whether damages was adequate remedy – Whether injunction applications barred by limitation – Whether issues raised in present suit already determined in another case

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.