Khor Kheng Long v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Seberang Perai Selatan [2023] 8 AMR 789, CA

Land law – Acquisition of land – Compensation – Appeal against – Landowner challenged High Court decision in accepting fair market value lower than value offered by JPPH – Compensation also sought for buildings erected on subject land – Whether appeal not maintainable in view of s 49 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 – Whether court could exercise discretionary power to arrive at compensation value below than that offered by JPPH – Whether building on land legal and ought to be compensated – Land Acquisition Act 1960, s 49, First Schedule, paragraph 1(3A)

Low Ean Nee v SNE Marketing Sdn Bhd [2023] 8 AMR 801, CA

Company law – Inspection of documents and records – Appeal – High Court dismissed application to inspect company's financial documents on grounds that applicant was non-participating director, actuated by mala fides and documents were unnecessary – Applicant removed as director post filing of notice of appeal – Whether applicant has absolute right to inspect company documents under s 245 of the Companies Act 2016 – Whether ex-director of company entitled to inspect company's documents – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Companies Act 2016, ss 245, 346

Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya v Bonifac Lobo a/l Robert V Lobo [2023] 8 AMR 828, CA

Civil procedure – Courts – Jurisdiction – Building erected without prior written permission of local authority – Building owner charged under s 70(1) of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 before Magistrate's Court – Application filed under s 35 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 against charge – High Court judge ("HCJ") made determination on charge and allowed application – Prior appeal against charge dismissed on preliminary objection of non-appealable matter – Whether application barred by res judicata – Whether consent for prosecution in breach of Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution – Whether HCJ's determination on charge had encroached into realm of criminal jurisdiction – Whether High Court, in exercising its supervisory jurisdiction, can make findings at supervisory stage about proceedings midway in trial court below – Whether review extends to making findings of fact within purview of trial court below – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 35 – Criminal Procedure Code, s 376(3) – Federal Constitution, Article 145(3) – Strata Titles Act 1985 – Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974, s 70(1)

AIA Berhad v Khantai a/p Vellaiahkonnda (as wife to Sures a/l Sennaya NRIC No: 770226-06-5917, deceased/nominee) [2023] 8 AMR 843, HC

Insurance – Life policy – Avoidance of liability – Death claim rejected for misrepresentation and/or non-disclosure of material fact when purchasing policy – Whether non-disclosure of medical history amounted to "material fact" – Whether insured intentionally misrepresented and/or actively concealed material fact – Whether rejection of death claim valid – Whether cancellation of insurance policy since inception justified – Financial Services Act 2013, s 129, Schedule 9

Chandra Kumar a/l Tamilselvan v Public Prosecutor [2023] 8 AMR 854, HC

Criminal procedure – Sentence – Appeal against – Trial court ordered commencement of imprisonment to start from date of conviction – Whether sentence ought to commence from date of conviction or date of arrest – Penal Code, ss 395, 397

KAS v VAS [2023] 8 AMR 858, HC

Family law – Divorce – Petition – Husband sought divorce attributable to wife's desertion and adulterous relationship – Wife sought for spousal and child maintenance along with other claims – Whether irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Whether divorce ought to be granted – Whether husband or wife responsible for breakdown – Whether wife being self-sufficient entitled to spousal maintenance – Whether husband liable to pay child maintenance – Whether joint guardianship ought to be granted with access rights to husband – Whether wife entitled to monetary claims – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, s 88(3)

Kerajaan Malaysia v Choong Wing Kwai & Anor [2023] 8 AMR 887, HC

Damages (General) – Liability in accident – Appeal against – Magistrate held parties equally liable for road accident – Whether parties equally liable – Whether magistrate failed to conduct proper analysis of evidence in order to determine which version was inherently probable – Whether magistrate's findings were unfounded – Whether negligence in road accident purely factual issue – Whether appeal maintainable in absence of "questions of law" in view of s 28 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 – Whether court empowered to invoke revisionary jurisdiction in present case – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, ss 28, 28(1), 32, 33