Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Article 14 federal constitution

Legal area

Court

8 Dec 2025

1. ) FRANCIS D NETTO 2. ) NANCY D NETTO 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

WA-24-27-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24-27-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiffs are Malaysian citizens by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b) read with Part II Section 1(a) because they were born within the Federation and their biological father was a Malaysian citizen at the time of their births; Section 17 Part III does not apply to defeat paternal transmission where paternity is established and acknowledged.
16 Jul 2025

1. ) CHONG KOK WAI 2. ) WEE LEE CHENG 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

BA-24-5-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24-5-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court applied binding Federal Court authority and held that (1) adoption after birth cannot satisfy section 1(a) since at least one parent must be a citizen at the time of birth; and (2) section 1(e) is to be construed narrowly by reference to descent and recognized citizenship at birth, therefore CYH is born an Indonesian citizen by virtue of his mother under Indonesian law notwithstanding practical non-registration; consequently the Originating Summons fails and is dismissed.
13 Mar 2025

1. ) KETUA PENGARAH PENDAFTARAN NEGARA, MALAYSIA 2. ) PENDAFTAR BESAR BAGI KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN, MALAYSIA 3. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA QUAH ENG PANG

Citation

K-01(A)-590-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

K-01(A)-590-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the respondent is not a Malaysian citizen by operation of law because she was born illegitimate and, by s.17 Part III Second Schedule, parentage for illegitimate children is the mother who is a Thai national; the respondent failed to discharge the burden of proving citizenship (Regulation 24) and produced no certificate of registration or naturalization, so Articles 26/27 and the Citizenship Rules did not apply; NRD's classification of her as non‑citizen was lawful; the High Court's finding of ultra vires and deprivation of citizenship was set aside.
1 Jan 1900

1. ) CHEW CHIA CHIA 2. ) CHEW CHIA CHING 1. ) KETUA PENDAFTARAN KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI

Citation

PA-34-5-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-34-5-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court followed the Court of Appeal decision in Madhuvita and held that legitimacy is to be assessed by reference to the person's prevailing/current status at the time of consideration; because the applicants had been legitimated by their parents' subsequent marriage and by court order they were legitimate for the purposes of s.17 and thus entitled to rely on their father's citizenship so as to be Malaysian citizens by operation of law under Article 14(1)(b).

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) FRANCIS D NETTO 2. ) NANCY D NETTO 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

1. ) CHONG KOK WAI 2. ) WEE LEE CHENG 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

1. ) KETUA PENGARAH PENDAFTARAN NEGARA, MALAYSIA 2. ) PENDAFTAR BESAR BAGI KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN, MALAYSIA 3. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA QUAH ENG PANG

1. ) CHEW CHIA CHIA 2. ) CHEW CHIA CHING 1. ) KETUA PENDAFTARAN KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI