Tetuan Wan Shahrizal, Hari & Co v Pendakwa Raya [2023] 4 AMR 389, FC

Criminal law – Freezing, seizure and forfeiture – Forfeiture of property where no prosecution – Proceeds from unlawful activity – Appeal – Court of Appeal dismissed claim by law firm for its legal fees to be paid from client's money seized under Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 ("the Act") – Whether law firm bona fide party under s 61(4) of the Act – Whether law firm has legitimate interest in client's properties – Whether right to counsel under Article 5(3) of the Federal Constitution infringed – Whether doctrine of stare decisis applicable in judgments without written grounds – Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, ss 44, 44(3)(c), 50(1), 51(1), 56, 56(1), 61, 61(1), (4) – Computer Crimes Act 1997, s 5 – Federal Constitution, Articles 5, 5(1), (3), 13 – Penal Code, ss 124, 130

Nursyafawati binti Kasim v Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu Bandar Raya Islam [2023] 4 AMR 437, CA

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Appeal against – Local authority clamped wheel of appellant's vehicle – Payment made towards costs of clamp and compound – Whether rules 8 and 17 of Perintah Pengangkutan Jalan (Letak Kereta Bermeter) (Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu) 2000 ("Perintah MPKB") ultra vires s 72(7) of the Road Transport Act 1987 ("RTA") – Whether rule 17 of Perintah MPKB enacted with authority of minister under s 66(1)(rr) of the RTA – Whether local authority had power to clamp wheels of vehicle pursuant to the RTA, for offence of parking at parking area where payment charge had lapsed – Perintah Pengangkutan Jalan (Letak Kereta Bermeter) (Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu) 2000, rules 8, 17 – Perintah (Tempat Letak Kereta) Kawasan Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu 1985 – Road Transport Act 1987, ss 3A(3A), 48, 48(2), 66(1)(rr), 72, 72(4), (4)(ff), (7) – Road Transport (Amendment) Act 2011, s 20

Hung Hung Trading (Sarawak) Sdn Bhd v Wong Yiik Seh & Anor [2023] 4 AMR 481, HC

Land law – Caveats – Removal – Disputes arising out of sale and purchase agreement between co-proprietors and developer of land – Co-proprietors lodged private caveat over land – Whether caveat ought to be removed – Whether co-proprietors of land had caveatable interest – Whether caveat sustainable in law

Renofajar Sdn Bhd v Wong Kam San & Anor [2023] 4 AMR 494, HC

Contract – Breach – Sale and purchase agreement – Appeal – Delayed completion of property by developer based on extensions of time issued by project architect – Sessions Court allowed purchaser's claim for liquidated ascertained damages ("LAD") and dismissed developer's counterclaim for monies owing by purchasers – Whether decision of Sessions Court plainly wrong – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Whether respondents entitled to LAD – Goods and Services Tax Act 2014, s 9(3) – Rules of Court 2012, Order 55 r 4(3)