Skip to main content

All Malaysia Reports (AMR) - Week 12 (Part 1)

/
Content updates

Recently added cases from AMR to Westlaw Asia

Low Ean Nee v Low Cheng Teik & 3 Ors [2023] 2 AMR 541, CA

Company law – Member's rights – Oppression – Appeal against dismissal of oppression action under s 346 of the Companies Act 2016 – Allegation of forged board resolutions for personal gain, mismanagement of company accounts and oppression by diversion of company business and assignment of its trademark to another company at nominal rate – Whether board resolutions forged – Whether company accounts tampered with – Whether oppression committed upon appellant – Companies Act 2016, s 346

Astro Radio Sdn Bhd v Industrial Court of Malaysia & Anor [2023] 2 AMR 558, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Application for certiorari to quash Industrial Court's award – Dismissal of employee on poor performance, without just cause and excuse upheld – Failure to meet expectation under three company's corrective action plans ("CAP") – Whether Industrial Court committed error of law or irrationality – Whether dismissal on poor performance justified – Whether placement of employee on CAPs tainted with mala fide – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s 20

Labour law – Employment – Termination – Dismissal of employee on poor performance, without just cause and excuse – Failure to meet expectation under three company's corrective action plans ("CAP") – Whether Industrial Court committed error of law or irrationality – Whether dismissal on poor performance justified – Whether placement of employee on CAPs tainted with mala fide – Industrial Relations Act 1967, s 20

Hin Maju Sdn Bhd v KS Chin Minerals Sdn Bhd [2023] 2 AMR 582, HC

Contract – Breach – Sale and purchase agreement – Appeal – Reliance upon ancillary oral agreement apart from sale and purchase agreement to claim set-off in recovery proceedings, dismissed – Whether ancillary oral agreement admissible in evidence – Whether appellate error exists – Evidence Act 1950, ss 92, 92(d), 103

Rohas-Euco Industries Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Kastam, Jabatan Kastam DiRaja Malaysia [2023] 2 AMR 600, HC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Bill of demand under Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 raised – Rejection of input tax credit ("ITC") claim due to late submission of goods and services tax ("GST") returns – Whether ITC claim liable to be rejected solely on late submission of GST returns – Whether issuance of bill of demand illegal – Whether any reviewable error exists – Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, s 41(6) – Goods and Services Tax (Repeal) Act 2018, s 8, 8(1)

Revenue law – Goods and services tax – Judicial review – Bill of demand under Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 raised – Rejection of input tax credit ("ITC") claim due to late submission of goods and services tax ("GST") returns – Whether ITC claim liable to be rejected solely on late submission of GST returns – Whether issuance of bill of demand illegal – Whether any reviewable error exists – Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, s 41(6) – Goods and Services Tax (Repeal) Act 2018, s 8, 8(1)

Tan Chin Yap v Nyanasegar a/l Muniandy & Anor [2023] 2 AMR 610, HC

Civil procedure – Courts – Jurisdiction – High Court order granting leave to commence motor vehicle accident claim on behalf of mentally disabled victim – Order sought to be impeached or annulled on ground of non-compliance with Part X of the Mental Health Act 2001 and Order 76 r 1A of the Rules of Court 2012 – Allegation that High Court order made without jurisdiction by senior assistant registrar – Whether a nullity – Whether High Court order ought to be impeached or annulled – Mental Health Act 2001, ss 52-58, 71, Part X – Rules of Court 2012, Order 76, Order 76 r 1A

Tang Heng Kit v Cindy Ong Pik Yin [2023] 2 AMR 624, HC

Family law – Children – Custody – Sole custody, care and control of children of marriage sought by husband – Breakdown of marriage on ground of wife's alleged adulterous relationship and exhibitionist lifestyle – Whether renders wife unfit mother – Whether husband entitled to sole custody, care and control of all or any of the children – Evidence Act 1950, s 103 – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s 88(3)

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.