Malaysia Case Law

22 May 2025

1. ) NOOR SITA BINTI OSMAN 2. ) NURAZAWIYAH BINTI ABD JALIL 3. ) ROSMAHADIYAZI BIN MAHMOOD 4. ) SRI SANGAR A/L ARUNASALAM 5. ) MAT KHAIRUDDIN BIN LEBAI IBRAHIM 6. ) MUHAMMAD REDHUAN BIN YACOB 7. ) MOHD FAZLI BIN MOHAMMAD YUSOF 8. ) MOHD NAZ

Citation

BA-25-4-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

BA-25-4-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applicants lacked valid licences and no statutory or legal right to occupy that could defeat the local authority's statutory powers; postponements and prior forbearance did not create a legitimate entitlement overriding express statutory requirements, and the Respondent lawfully exercised its powers for road widening/public safety so there was no illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety warranting quashing of the demolition notice.

• Legitimate expectation
• Procedural impropriety
• Illegality
• Wednesbury unreasonableness
• Licensing
• Demolition of structures

23 Nov 2023

MFCX CAPITAL SDN BHD

Citation

PA-87-580-03/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Court

Magistrates' Court

Case number

PA-87-580-03/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Storing approximately 20 coffins in the rented premises constituted use of the premises as a warehouse/business requiring a licence under UUK 3 and Schedule Two; the defendant had no licence (application was refused) and the offence is one of strict liability so mens rea was unnecessary; prosecution proved a prima facie case and the defence failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore conviction was warranted and sentence imposed.

• Licensing
• Strict liability
• Prima facie test
• Mitigation
• Stay of execution

9 Feb 2023

CHENDELADEVAN A/L KUPPUSAMY Majlis Bandaraya Pulau Pinang

Citation

PA-A51NCvC-27-07/2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court

Sessions Court

Case number

PA-A51NCvC-27-07/2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Defendant owed and breached a duty of care: officers acted under statutory by‑laws when seizing an uncollared dog in a council area, the dog appeared to be stray and owner was absent, veterinary evidence showed dart dosage within safe margin and the dog was aged with evidence supporting natural death, there was no reliable evidence of cruel handling, res ipsa loquitur did not apply, and vicarious liability could not be established because the officer allegedly at fault was not made a party. Accordingly the claim is dismissed w…

• Negligence
• Vicarious liability
• Statutory powers and by‑laws
• Licensing
• Res ipsa loquitur
• Damages

1 Sept 2022

BEEMER SDN BHD 1. ) Datuk Bandar, Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya 2. ) MAJLIS BANDARAYA PETALING JAYA

Citation

BA-25-53-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

BA-25-53-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Extension of time was refused because the applicant filed the judicial review well beyond the three‑month period without showing a good reason, there was a pending appeal on the same subject (JR 112) creating a risk of abuse of process and duplicative litigation, and the applicant's arguments (including lack of prejudice to respondents) did not constitute sufficient good reason; consequently the leave application was not entertained and the extension was dismissed.

• Extension of time
• Leave to apply for judicial review
• Certiorari
• Mandamus
• Licensing
• Abuse of process

9 Feb 2022

1. ) SUZANNAH HELEN HARVEY 2. ) RONAN FRANCIS HARVEY 1. ) Langkawi Yacht Club Bhd 2. ) Royal Langkawi Yacht Club

Citation

WA-27NCC-69-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

WA-27NCC-69-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Court found that (1) the Vessel sustained the engine and associated electrical damage after using fuel primarily bunkered at the RLYC on 4.7.2018; (2) independent laboratory tests and corroborated expert and eyewitness evidence established water and high sodium content consistent with saltwater contamination in Starboard/Day Tank fuel; (3) the Defendant failed to prove integrity of its bulk fuel installation or that contamination originated elsewhere and was negligent (and breached the implied condition of fitness under s16 SOGA); causation and loss establi…

• Contaminated fuel
• Causation
• Damages assessment
• Mitigation of loss
• Expert evidence
• Regulatory compliance

1 Oct 2021

Perbadanan Pengurusan Solaris Dutamas 1. ) SURUHANJAYA TENAGA MALAYSIA 2. ) GAS MALAYSIA BERHAD

Citation

W-01(NCvC)(A)-480-09/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court

NCvC

Case number

W-01(NCvC)(A)-480-09/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that the Management Corporation’s duties and powers are confined by the SMA 2013 and do not include assuming the role of a retail licensee or supplying/maintaining natural gas to individual unit owners or levying consumption-based charges; consequently notices or orders requiring the MC to do so are ultra vires the SMA. The High Court's contrary interpretation of S.59(1)(e) was erroneous and merit appellate correction.

• Ultra vires
• Management corporation powers
• Licensing
• Charges and levies
• Conflict of statutes

ENERGOPROJEK (M) HOLDINGS V. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation

ENERGOPROJEK (M) HOLDINGS V. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Court

Malaysian court

On purposive and contextual construction the statutory definition of 'housing development' requires an element of sale or purchaser protection; where a company constructs more than four units solely as staff accommodation with no intention to sell, it does not engage in 'housing development' under the Act and therefore no licence is required; the offence under s.5(1) is not strict liability in this context and conviction cannot stand.

• Strict liability
• Licensing
• Definition of housing development
• Purchaser protection