Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to appeal

Legal area

Court

24 Jun 2025

SEMANTAN ESTATE (1952) SDN. BHD. 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) PESURUHJAYA TANAH PERSEKUTUAN 3. ) MENTERI YANG BERTANGGUNGJAWAB BAGI TANAH DI WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN 4. ) MENTERI SUMBER ASLI DAN ALAM SEKITAR 5. ) KETUA PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN 6

Citation

W-01(A)-668-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-668-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The High Court's order directing transfer and registration of the subject land to Semantan Estate under s 417 NLC was set aside because the sealed 29.12.2009 judgment did not order transfer, Semantan Estate did not seek clarification or exercise the implied liberty to apply at the material time, and beneficial interest alone did not confer a right to registration of title.
28 Jan 2025

MEGALA NATHAN A/L MARIAPPAN [ ]

Citation

N-09(H)-224-06/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

N-09(H)-224-06/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Omission by the learned Magistrate to expressly state at the close of the prosecution's case that she invoked the presumption under s.37(d) DDA 1952 did not amount to a miscarriage of justice because s.180 CPC does not require the trial judge to state reasons or identify invoked presumptions when calling for defence and the Magistrate's judgment demonstrated she applied the presumption; conviction and sentence are safe.
6 Sept 2024

NORDIN BIN KASSIM MURALLITHARAN A/L MUNISAMY PENCELAH MAJLIS PEGUAM

Citation

W-08-99-03/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

W-08-99-03/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Application for extension of time dismissed because the delay of 154 days was inordinate and unexplained, the appellant (an advocate) bore responsibility for procedural failures including omission of the intervener and failure to seek extension earlier, solicitor’s default was not a sufficient excuse, and the proposed appeal lacked merit given the appellant’s admissions and documentary evidence showing receipt and clearance of the RM100,000.
8 Aug 2024

PEMPETISYEN CHENG YONG PIN ARBORLAND & CO. SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28NCC-953-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-953-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The respondent failed to demonstrate good reason or special circumstances to justify a stay; the statutory notice was proved served and non-payment raised the presumption of commercial insolvency which the respondent did not rebut; accordingly the winding-up petition must be allowed and the stay application dismissed.
12 Jul 2024

1. ) PUVINRAAJH A/L SUBRAMANIAM 2. ) YUVARAJAN A/L SUBBAIH MISC BERHAD

Citation

W-08-141-04/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

W-08-141-04/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Applicants failed to demonstrate a prima facie case of error in the High Court's decision; the respondent sufficiently proved the RM83,754.00 compensation by pleading the sum and adducing a Statement of Training Costs & Expenses with testimony from the preparer (SP2), and the compensation is recoverable under s.74 Contracts Act 1950 and s.5(b) Contracts (Amendment) Act 1976; therefore leave is refused under s.68 CJA 1964.
14 May 2024

1. ) Pendaftar Mualaf Negeri Perlis 2. ) Majlis Agama Islam dan Adat Istiadat Melayu Perlis 3. ) Dato' Arif Perkasa Dr. Mohd Asri bin Zainul Abidin (Disaman Sebagai Mufti Negeri Perlis) 4. ) Kerajaan Negeri Perlis Loh Siew Hong

Citation

08(f)-35-02/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

08(f)-35-02/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Leave to appeal was dismissed because apostasy falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts and the appellant had voluntarily submitted to that jurisdiction; binding precedents (Rosliza and Dahlia) mandated refusal of the federal leave application.
16 Feb 2024

SYAMSUL ZAMAN BIN SUKRI

Citation

D-07-113-12/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

D-07-113-12/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court refused leave because the applicant advanced factual complaints about inconsistencies in witness accounts of time rather than any arguable question of law; the discrepancies were held to be minor and properly addressed by the trial court, so there was no demonstrable legal error by the High Court that would justify leave under s50(2).
15 Feb 2024

SHEILA SHARON A/P STEVEN KUMAR

Citation

B-07-89-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

B-07-89-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Leave to appeal was granted because the High Court's exercise of revision without notifying or hearing the accused breached s.325(2) CPC and the audi alteram partem principle, constituting a miscarriage of justice and raising questions of law; therefore the applicant satisfied the threshold for leave under s.50(2) CJA.
27 Oct 2023

ALUPOLE (M) SDN. BHD. METAL ONE ENGINEERING SDN. BHD.

Citation

B-08-49-03/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

B-08-49-03/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court refused leave because the applicant failed to demonstrate any prima facie error of law or fact; the trial judge had adequately and inclusively considered the evidence and permissibly concluded the defendant fulfilled its contractual obligations, and the matters complained of were factual issues inappropriate for leave to appeal.
25 May 2023

XXXX [ ]

Citation

B-05(H)-36-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

B-05(H)-36-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Probation reports failed to comply with s.75(1)(b) Child Act 2001 because they did not contain explanations that the child was unsuitable for rehabilitation in an approved school; therefore the orders sending the appellant to Henry Gurney School were illegal and founded on misdirection; appellate court substituted a non-custodial disposal consistent with statutory constraints by ordering 100 hours of community service under s.91(1)(da).