Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Separation of powers

Legal area

Court

7 May 2026

Bar Malaysia 1. ) PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA 2. ) AHMAD ZAHID BIN HAMIDI

Citation

W-01(IM)-488-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-01(IM)-488-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Order 53 prescribes a single leave test: the applicant must show an arguable, non-frivolous case; where Article 145(3) prosecutorial discretion is challenged the ordinary leave test applies but must be applied with heightened discipline, caution and restraint given the presumption of legality and separation of powers; the appellant satisfied that threshold on the facts and the High Court erred in applying an unduly exacting test requiring 'compelling and prima facie proof'; appeal allowed and leave granted.
22 Apr 2026

SIVACHANDRAN A/L S JAYARAJAH

Citation

05(RJ)-6-11/2024(C) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

RJ
Case number

05(RJ)-6-11/2024(C) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Applicants failed to prove a causal link or provide medical evidence that whipping as statutorily prescribed causes death or violates Arts 5 or 8; r137 review was permissible because factual substratum (Zaidi’s death) was unavailable at resentencing; on merits the amended provisions (s39B DDA, s302 Penal Code read with CPC safeguards) are constitutional and proportionate; Art 8(2) challenge fails.
22 Apr 2026

MOHD HELMI ANUAR BIN MOHD KASSIM PEGUAM PEMERHATI Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM) AMICUS CURIAE Collin Arvind Andrew

Citation

07-23-11/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

W
Case number

07-23-11/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Applicants met a limited r 137 threshold because the factual substratum (Zaidi's death) was unavailable at resentencing, but they failed to prove a clear constitutional transgression: no reliable medical causal link between whipping and death was shown, statutory safeguards and procedural limits render whipping not violative of Art 5 or Art 8, and the gender exemption does not breach Art 8(2); therefore all review applications dismissed.
26 Feb 2026

1. ) KARTINI FARAH BINTI ABD RAHIM 2. ) MUKUNNAN A/L SUGUMARAN 3. ) HONG HAI SAN 4. ) SHASHI KUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM 1. ) Majlis Daerah Besut 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Terengganu

Citation

TA-24NCvC-233-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

TA-24NCvC-233-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs lacked locus standi under the 'adversely affected' test; civil courts cannot grant declarations that effectively determine criminal liability under penal provisions (Prayers I and II struck out); section 30(2) of the Animal Welfare Act 2015 operates as an exception to subsection (1) permitting killing by firearms for the enumerated purposes including population control; the by-laws (s9(1)&(2)) were validly enacted under the Local Government Act 1976 and are not ultra vires the AWA 2015 when read harmoniously; the State Government is not liable for declaratory reliefs against the lo…
30 Apr 2025

LAI SIEW SHIANG PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, KUALA LUMPUR

Citation

WA-24NCvC-2594-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-2594-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Originating Summons was defective because the intitulement failed to specify the statutory provision empowering the relief; Section 417 NLC and Article 13 FC do not authorize the declaration sought; the matter concerns executive powers over land and should be referred to the State Authority for reconsideration, with judicial review available if administrative remedies fail; accordingly the OS is dismissed.
25 Mar 2025

1. ) WONG HENG CHOON 2. ) CHOO LEE LIN PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, KUALA LUMPUR

Citation

WA-24NCvC-344-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-344-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The originating summons was dismissed because the intitulement failed to specify the proper statutory provisions empowering the court to grant the relief; Section 417 NLC and Article 13 FC as cited did not authorize the declaratory order sought; the matter falls within executive authority over land and the correct procedural route is referral to the State Authority for reconsideration or judicial review (certiorari/mandamus) if unlawful action persists.
25 Mar 2025

WONG SIEW TSAE PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, KUALA LUMPUR

Citation

WA-24NCvC-342-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-342-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The originating summons was defective for failing to specify the statutory provision empowering the relief; the Court lacked jurisdiction to grant the substantive declaration because the National Land Code vests powers over surrender and re‑alienation in the State/executive; the proper course is referral to the State Authority for reconsideration and, if necessary, judicial review, therefore the OS is dismissed.
3 Mar 2025

1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 1. ) Dr Vijaendreh A/P Subramaniam 2. ) Dr Che Amir Farid Bin Che Isahak

Citation

01(f)-16-04/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

01(f)-16-04/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Declarations were permissible and did not amount to abuse of process or impermissibly interfere with criminal investigation; on statutory construction the Poisons Act 1952 (sections 18, 19 and 21) expressly permits registered medical practitioners to sell, supply or administer Group B poisons (including Ivermectin) to their patients for treatment and that right is not nullified by the Sale of Drugs Act 1952 or the Control of Drugs and Cosmetics Regulations 1984; subsidiary regulations cannot curtail primary legislation; appeal dismissed and Court of Appeal decision affirmed.
24 Feb 2025

1. ) LEE KWONG LENG 2. ) CHAN LAI CHEE PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, KUALA LUMPUR

Citation

WA-24NCvC-136-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-136-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The originating summons was dismissed because the intitulement failed to specify the statutory provision empowering the declaratory relief sought; Section 417 and Article 13 were inapplicable to grant the declaration; matters concerning surrender and re‑alienation of land lie within the executive domain and the correct remedy is administrative reconsideration or judicial review (certiorari/mandamus) rather than the declaratory order sought.
2 Jul 2024

IRHAZMI BIN ALI KASIM 1. ) PENDAFTAR BESAR KELAHIRAN DAN KEMATIAN JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA MALAYSIA 2. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA 3. ) Ketua Setiausaha Menteri Dalam Negeri

Citation

JA-24NCvC-969-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-24NCvC-969-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applicant failed to discharge the burden to prove he was 'not born a citizen of any country' (jus sanguinis) because contemporaneous registration and birth certificate established parents of Indonesian descent and prima facie non‑Malaysian status; absent specific, verifiable inquiries or evidence about parents' citizenship the court could not find statelessness; naturalisation is an executive matter not for the court to grant; therefore the originating summons is dismissed.