Marzida binti Mansor v Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja [2023] 6 AMR 341, CA

Bankruptcy – Bankruptcy notice – Setting aside – Validity of 13 year old summary judgment impugned on ground of nullity – Whether bankruptcy notice and summary judgment null and void – Whether stipulation in summary judgment compliant and clear – Whether judgment debtor ("JD") entitled to set aside summary judgment – Part payments made by JD – Whether amounts to clear acts admitting correctness of summary judgment – Whether appealable error warranting appellate intervention to the extent of looking beyond bankruptcy notice – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 72 – Employees Provident Fund Act 1991, ss 46, 49 – Rules of Court 2012

Civil procedure – Summary judgment – Validity of 13 year old summary judgment impugned on ground of nullity – Whether bankruptcy notice and summary judgment null and void – Whether stipulation in summary judgment compliant and clear – Whether judgment debtor ("JD") entitled to set aside summary judgment – Part payments made by JD – Whether amounts to clear acts admitting correctness of summary judgment – Whether appealable error warranting appellate intervention to the extent of looking beyond bankruptcy notice – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 72 – Employees Provident Fund Act 1991, ss 46, 49 – Rules of Court 2012

Pentadbir Tanah Johor Bahru v Tanah Sutera Development Sdn Bhd [2023] 6 AMR 361, CA

Civil procedure – Striking out – Appeal – Compensation awarded increased – Notice of appeal – Whether bad in law and incompetent – Non-disclosure of questions of law appealed on – Whether s 40D(3) and proviso to s 49(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 ("the LAA") complied with – Questions stated in memorandum of appeal – Whether questions of law for purpose of appeal – Delay in service of appeal, non-inclusion of "judge's notes" and non-filing of separate volumes – Whether fatal – Whether failure to comply with rule 18(1) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994 in memorandum of appeal – Whether decision of High Court complied with s 40C of the LAA – Whether cross-appeal should be struck out – Land Acquisition Act 1960, ss 40C, 40D(3), 49, 49(1) – Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994, rules 3A, 4A, 18(1), (4)(b), 93, 102, 103, 104

Land law – Acquisition of land – Reference – Appeal against – Compensation awarded increased – Notice of appeal – Whether bad in law and incompetent – Non-disclosure of questions of law appealed on – Whether s 40D(3) and proviso to s 49(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 ("the LAA") complied with – Questions stated in memorandum of appeal – Whether questions of law for purpose of appeal – Delay in service of appeal, non-inclusion of the "judge's notes" and non-filing of separate volumes – Whether fatal – Whether failure to comply with rule 18(1) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994 in memorandum of appeal – Whether decision of High Court complied with s 40C of the LAA – Land Acquisition Act 1960, ss 40C, 40D(3), 49, 49(1) – Rules of the Court of Appeal 1994, rules 3A, 4A, 18(1), (4)(b), 93, 102, 103, 104

Chandrasegaran a/l Veeryah (berniaga sebagai Thurgas Agencies) v Thurgas Industries Sdn Bhd [2023] 6 AMR 405, HC

Civil procedure – Judgment in default – Setting aside – Sessions Court entered judgment in default of appearance ("JID") – Application to set aside JID dismissed – High Court allowed appeal and Sessions Court's decision reversed – Whether High Court's decision appealable – Applicability of amendments to s 68(1)(g) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 – Whether there were prima facie defence on merits – Whether appeal time-barred – Courts of Judicature Act 1964, s 68, 68(1), (1)(g) – Rules of Court 2012

Ng Chun Chien (trading under the name and style of CC.NG Architect) v Victorious Realty Sdn Bhd & Anor [2023] 6 AMR 417, HC

Partnership – Partners – Liability – Claim for professional fees from developer and landowner – Provisional approval granted – Whether developer and landowner jointly and severally liable for acts of developer – Whether liable for fees impose for work done – Whether fees due – Whether approval of project sufficient for release of fees – Contracts Act 1950, Part X – Land Code (Cap 81) (Sarawak)

Professions – Architects – Fees – Claim for professional fees from developer and landowner – Provisional approval granted – Whether developer and landowner jointly and severally liable for acts of developer – Whether liable for fees imposed for work done – Whether fees due – Whether approval of project sufficient for release of fees – Contracts Act 1950, Part X – Land Code (Cap 81) (Sarawak)

Petronas Carigali Sdn Bhd (PCSB) v Pemungut Duti Setem [2023] 6 AMR 427, HC

Revenue law – Stamp duty – Supply contract – Appeal against – Allegation that assessment raised on agreement null and void – Assessment under item 22(1)(a) of the First Schedule to the Stamp Act 1949 ("the Act") – Whether error in determining service price in agreement as price of agreement – Whether nature of agreement subject to stamp duty – Whether stamp duty required to be paid was to be assessed under item 4 or item 22(1)(a) of the First Schedule to the Act – Stamp Act 1949, ss 38A, 39, items 4, 22(1)(a) of the First Schedule

Tang Choon Meng & 2 Ors v Khoo Boo Lai & 2 Ors   [2023] 6 AMR 436, HC

Civil procedure – Withdrawal and discontinuance – Discontinuance of action with leave – Suit instituted against administrators of deceased's estate prior to issuance of grant of letter of administration – Whether withdrawal ought to be allowed with liberty to file afresh – Whether issues raised should be ventilated in probate action – Whether withdrawal would cause prejudice – Whether would lead to multiplicity of proceedings and abuse of process – Rules of Court 2012, Order 21 r 3, Order 72

Held, partly allowing encl 76, without liberty to file afresh