Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial review grounds

Legal area

Court

9 Dec 2025

1. ) ONG PHAIK KOOI 2. ) LAW WEY ANN 1. ) TRIBUNAL PERUMAHAN DAN PENGURUSAN STRATA 2. ) AMBER COURT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

Citation

WA-25-218-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-218-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s factual findings and legal conclusions: miscellaneous charges (insurance premium, quit rent, internal sanitary charges) were lawfully incurred and recoverable under the SMA and relevant contracts; maintenance and sinking fund rates were imposed and implemented on share unit basis as required by the SMA; the alleged duplicity with Suit 209 was unfounded because Suit 209 concerned water charges and did not permit set-off against statutory charges; late payment charges were permissible under s.60(3)(c). Therefore the Tribunal’s awards were not ultra vires, ir…
4 Jun 2025

Centralfields Sdn Bhd Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri

Citation

BA-25-54-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-54-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the Federal Court's declaration in Wiramuda that section 4C of the Income Tax Act 1967 is unconstitutional is to be applied prospectively; section 4C was therefore valid at the time the YA2016 assessment was raised and the Applicant's judicial review seeking refund was dismissed as the assessment was final and the application was out of time; no order as to costs.
4 Dec 2024

RAKAN SETIA HOUSING SDN. BHD. 1. ) MOHD ADI FIRDAUS BIN MAT SAAD 2. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH

Citation

WA-25-278-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-278-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Tribunal properly applied s35(1) COVID-19 Act by excluding 167 days and recalculated the delivery date; the Settlement Letter was merely an acknowledgement of receipt without clear reference to LAD and payments predated crystallisation of LAD, so there was no binding settlement or waiver of statutory LAD under cl 24 of the SPA; absent jurisdictional error or irrationality the Award stands and judicial review is dismissed.
8 Aug 2024

BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA COVA SUITES PESURUHJAYA BANGUNAN, MAJLIS BANDARAYA PETALING JAYA

Citation

BA-25-57-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-57-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Commissioner acted within statutory powers under subparagraph 11(5) of the Second Schedule to the SMA 2013 because the applicant failed to hold annual AGMs, failed to convene an EGM within the statutory period after requisition, failed to file audited accounts and breached subparagraph 2(5) concerning office tenure; the Commissioner is not required to verify the detailed validity of requisitions before authorizing a person to convene an EGM, therefore the impugned decision was lawful, rational and procedurally proper.
28 May 2024

UNIQ EVENT & CATERING 1. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PENGGUNA 2. ) HADI SOPHIAAN BIN ROSLAN

Citation

BA-25-20-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-20-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the applicant failed to demonstrate procedural impropriety, illegality or irrationality sufficient for judicial review: oral reasons were adequate, there was no evidence of interruption or bias, the applicant failed to discharge the burden under s.7 Act 829 to show inability caused by COVID-19 measures, and issues such as mitigation were not pleaded; therefore the High Court dismissed the judicial review and awarded costs.
6 Dec 2022

Hong Leong Yamaha Motor Sdn Bhd KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN KASTAM DIRAJA MALAYSIA

Citation

BA-25-5-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-5-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the Director General acted within the statutory framework: the Exemption Order must be read with the Sales Tax Act 2018 which concerns taxable goods and registered manufacturers, the Exemption Certificate expressly limited use to ‘finished taxable goods’, and the Director General was empowered to impose conditions under Schedule C; consequently the Bills of Demand were lawfully issued and the judicial review was dismissed.
22 May 2022

1. ) FOH CHONG & SONS SDN BHD 2. ) DE BALI RESTAURANT & BISTRO SDN BHD PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH JOHOR BAHRU

Citation

JA-25-22-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-25-22-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application was dismissed: the court held the applicants' complaints were speculative absent any present development; the 1998 Regulations' consultation and standards are directory rather than mandatory and do not render the acquisition illegal; the respondent acted within the Land Acquisition Act and accepted MRTS technical revisions were a legitimate basis to reduce the area; disputes as to measurement or compensation belong to the land reference process, not judicial review.
12 May 2022

1. ) KANG LIH YUAN 2. ) NG TECK HING 1. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 2. ) PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH KLANG 3. ) Majlis Perbandaran Klang 4. ) MAJLIS MESYUARAT KERAJAAN NEGERI SELANGOR

Citation

BA-25-37-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-37-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the respondents acted within the statutory authority conferred by ss146–150 and ss147(3)–(4) of the National Land Code and applicable Selangor Land Rules; the restriction in interest and the RM430,000 premium were lawful, the premium calculation was not flawed, and there was no illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety, therefore the judicial review application failed.
30 Dec 2020

KIMMU TRADING SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 923027-P) 1. MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 2. NORFADILAH BINTI MOHD SAZALI (NO. K/P: XXXXXX-XX-XXXX)

Citation

JB-25-2-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-25-2-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found no error in the Industrial Court's decision: the employee was negligent and misconduct was established but reinstatement was not appropriate due to breakdown of trust; however the employer failed to show consideration of statutory alternatives under s.14(1) before dismissing, so the Industrial Court's award of compensation in lieu of notice (RM5,220) and back wages (RM36,540) was proportionate and is upheld; the judicial review application is dismissed with costs.
22 Sept 2019

SKS SOUTHERN SDN BHD (Dahulu dikenali sebagai MB Builders Sdn Bhd) (No.Syarikat: 842965-P) 1. TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH MALAYSIA 2. REMEGGIOUS KRISHNAN

Citation

JA-25-21-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-25-21-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application was dismissed because the Applicant effectively admitted the material assertions by failing to contradict the Second Respondent's affidavit; on the merits the Tribunal properly exercised its discretion to hear the split claims, and correctly concluded delivery of vacant possession was invalid without electricity supply ready for connection, entitling the Second Respondent to damages which were reasonably computed; therefore no certiorari was warranted and the Tribunal award stands.