Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Ringelmann chart

  • 13 Feb 2025

    KOK FOH PALM OIL MILL

    Citation
    NA-63ES-38-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    NA-63ES-38-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on the third essential element because of unresolved doubts over the authenticity and compliance of the Ringelmann chart used, inability to confirm the same chart was used in investigation and produced in court, failures and inconsistencies in observation procedure (distance and timing) and investigator competence, and overall inadequacy of the investigation to produce credible evidence; therefore the accused was acquitted.

  • 29 Mar 2024

    CLASSIC PALM OIL MILL SDN BHD

    Citation
    NA-63ES-14-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    NA-63ES-14-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Smoke Density Meter was non-functional for extended periods without notification, that performance monitoring records were absent, that Ringelmann observations demonstrated aggregate exceedance (36.25 minutes) above permitted Ringelmann No.2 allowance, and that a new decanter dryer was installed without prior written notification; these facts satisfied offences under Regulations 5(1)(d), 8, 9(b) of the Air Quality Regulations 2014 and section 16(1) of the Environmental Quality Act 1974 and warranted conviction and fines as impose…

  • 29 Mar 2024

    CLASSIC PALM OIL MILL SDN BHD

    Citation
    NA-63ES-15-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    NA-63ES-15-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The court found prosecution evidence (investigator testimony, smoke density charts, Ringelmann observations and photographs) established beyond reasonable doubt that the Smoke Density Meter had failed and no notification was given within one hour, performance monitoring records were absent, a new decanter dryer was installed without prior written notification, and Ringelmann observations converted to time demonstrated aggregate exceedance of permitted smoke darkness (36.25/36.5 minutes > 5 minutes). Defence challenges did not raise reasonable doubt; accordingly convictions on the charged regu…