Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Comity of nations

Legal area

Court

20 Jul 2022

LFL SDN BHD Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

W-01(IM)-393-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-01(IM)-393-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the High Court erred in striking out the originating summonses because the issues (extra‑territorial effect of Singapore law and interaction with sovereign immunity and constitutional rights) raise serious questions requiring full and mature consideration and are not plainly or obviously unsustainable; thus the striking out under O.18 r.19 was inappropriate and the matters must be remitted to the High Court for full hearing.
20 Jul 2022

LFL SDN BHD PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA

Citation

W-01(IM)-390-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-01(IM)-390-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The High Court erred in striking out the originating summonses because the claims raised serious questions fit for full and mature consideration — specifically the scope of extra‑territorial application of Singapore law (POFMA) and the interaction with sovereign immunity and constitutional rights — and thus the matters were not 'plain and obvious' nor obviously unsustainable; appeals are allowed and matters remitted to the High Court.
10 Jun 2021

LFL SDN BHD KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Citation

WA-24-46-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24-46-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court struck out OS 46 and OS 51 because it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the validity or enforcement in Malaysia of a foreign sovereign's statutory direction (POFMA) where the foreign state (Singapore) is recognised as a foreign sovereign and the act complained of is governmental (acta jure imperii) attracting sovereign immunity; consequently the claims were plain, obvious, frivolous and an abuse of process and had no prospect of success.
12 Nov 2019

BINA PURI HOLDING BERHAD & SATU LAGI NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY & DUA LAGI

Citation

wa-22c-82-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

wa-22c-82-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application for interlocutory injunction was dismissed because the Plaintiffs failed to show serious triable issues sufficient to restrain payment: the Letters of Suretyship/Guarantee legally obliged payment, the Thai Central Administrative Court had adjudged the claim, the unconscionability test did not operate to restrain payout after adjudication, damages were an adequate remedy, and principles of comity and public policy precluded granting an anti-enforcement injunction affecting a foreign judgment; the proper forum for relief was the Thai courts.

Malaysia Case Law

LFL SDN BHD Kerajaan Malaysia

LFL SDN BHD PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA

LFL SDN BHD KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

BINA PURI HOLDING BERHAD & SATU LAGI NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY & DUA LAGI