Kolonel Dr Faiz Azraai bin Abdul Aziz v Mahkamah Tentera Divisyen Keempat Infantri Malaysia [2023] 5 AMR 701, FC

Administrative law – Remedies – Judicial review – Conviction of offence of desertion under s 54(1)(a) of the Armed Forces Act 1972 ("the Act") – Long period of unsanctioned absence – Application for judicial review dismissed by High Court and Court of Appeal – Whether offence established – Whether continuous period of unsanctioned absence sufficient to establish offence of desertion – Whether requisite intention to remain permanently absent from duty under s 54(2) of the Act made out – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 54(1)(a), (2), (2)(a), (b), 55, 128, 174(4) – Federal Constitution, Article 5

Courts – Jurisdiction – Military Court – Conviction of offence of desertion under s 54(1)(a) of the Armed Forces Act 1972 ("the Act") – Long period of unsanctioned absence – Application for judicial review dismissed by High Court and Court of Appeal – Whether matters within purview of Federal Court – Whether courts could intervene in military courts' decisions or in matters of military law – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 54(1)(a), (2), (2)(a), (b), 55, 128, 174(4) – Federal Constitution, Article 5

555 Film Sdn Bhd & 3 Ors v Adamancy Construction Sdn Bhd [2023] 5 AMR 718, CA

Contract – Breach – Termination of agreement – Film production terminated by producer due to investor's failure to release third tranche of investment sum – Extension of completion period mutually agreed by parties – Whether agreement had been varied owing to request for extension of time of completion period and date of release of film – Whether termination of agreement valid – Whether there was breach of contract which entitled producer to terminate agreement – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Contracts Act 1950, s 63

Alagamah a/p Ponniah & 3 Ors v Theresa a/p Mariasoosay & 2 Ors [2023] 5 AMR 730, HC

Probate and administration – Intestate estate – Distribution – Wife and children of deceased's brother claimed entitlement to distribution of deceased's estate – Brother pre-deceased deceased – Whether only brothers and sisters of the deceased living at the time of deceased's death are entitled to deceased's estate – Whether plaintiffs' claim ought to be allowed – Distribution Act 1958, ss 5, 6(1)(h), (i), 7(2)

Cheah Yee Chen (trading under the name and style of Superbrain Training Centre) & 5 Ors v Safeway Solutions Sdn Bhd & 6 Ors [2023] 5 AMR 739, HC

Contract – Breach – Illegality – Licensing agreements for running centre to conduct brain development programs for young children terminated for contravening the Franchise Act 1998 and Education Act 1996 – Whether termination unlawful – Whether agreements were franchise agreements and void for illegality – Whether agreements vitiated by fraud, deceit, misrepresentation and/or undue influence – Whether principle of pari delicto applicable – Whether plaintiffs entitled to compensation, damages, interests and costs – Contracts Act 1950, s 66 – Education Act 1996, ss 77, 78 – Franchise Act 1998, s 4

Contract – Breach – Misrepresentation – Licensing agreements for running centre to conduct brain development programs for young children terminated for contravening the Franchise Act 1998 and Education Act 1996 – Whether termination unlawful – Whether agreements were franchise agreements and void for illegality – Whether agreements vitiated by fraud, deceit, misrepresentation and/or undue influence – Whether principle of pari delicto applicable – Whether plaintiffs entitled to compensation, damages, interests and costs – Contracts Act 1950, s 66 – Education Act 1996, ss 77, 78 – Franchise Act 1998, s 4

Fused Project Sdn Bhd v Tetap Tiara Sdn Bhd [2023] 5 AMR 771, HC

Civil procedure – Summary judgment – Application for – Action commenced by tenant seeking order for entitlement to renewal of tenancy agreement – Counterclaim against tenant for declaration that letter of offer for tenancy expired – Counterclaim for vacant possession of demised premises – Whether application ought to be allowed – Whether tenant had "show cause" against application under Order 14 of the Rules of Court 2012 – Whether doctrine of legitimate expectation applicable – Whether any representation which altered terms of tenancy existed – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14 rr 1, 3, 4, 5

Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri Malaysia v Ng Huan Tong [2023] 5 AMR 788, HC

Revenue law – Real property gains tax – Gains from disposal of property – Director General of Inland Revenue ("DGIR") issued notice of assessment and notices of additional assessment pursuant to disposal of lands by taxpayer – Special Commissioners of Income Tax allowed taxpayer's appeal and found disposal of lands did not constitute trading – Whether lands acquired for investment or trading – Whether gains/profit from disposal of lands taxable under Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 or Income Tax Act 1967 ("ITA") – Whether DGIR correct to impose penalty under s 113(2) of the ITA – Whether appellate interference warranted – Income Tax Act 1967 – Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976

KH Khoon Construction Sdn Bhd v Saraswathi a/p Nadarajan [2023] 5 AMR 802, HC

Civil procedure – Judgments and orders – Setting aside – Ex parte prohibitory order granted by High Court in favour of judgment creditor – Whether prohibitory order irregular for want of service of cause papers upon judgment debtor – Whether High Court proper forum – Whether doctrine of res judicata applicable – Whether prohibitory order ought to be set aside – National Land Code 1965, s 334 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 18 r 19, Order 29, Order 47 r 6, 6(b), (k) – Specific Relief Act 1950 – Subordinate Courts Act 1948

Mohd Fadzli bin Mohd Nadzri & 14 Ors (all of them are suing in their personal capacity and also as representatives of all fifteen (15) buyers of residential units in a mixed development project known as "YOU VISTA" built on the Master Title No. Geran Mukim 7445 Lot 58266 at Batu 8, Jalan Cheras, Cheras Town, Hulu Langat District, State of Selangor) v PJD Regency Sdn Bhd [2023] 5 AMR 812, HC

Civil procedure – Striking out – Writ and statement of claim – Sale and purchase agreements ("SPAs") amended pursuant to extension of time obtained from Ministry of Housing and Local Government – Belated delivery of vacant possession to purchasers – Settlement of claims done as per amended SPAs – Whether plaintiffs filed wrong mode of commencement – Whether claims time-barred – Whether doctrine of estoppel applicable – Whether claims ought to be struck out – Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 – Rules of Court 2012, Order 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (d)