Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Whistleblower protection act 2010

Legal area

Court

5 Jul 2022

Nor'isham Bin Manap PENGARAH POLITEKNIK SULTAN SALAHUDDIN ABDUL AZIZ SHAH

Citation

BA-24NCvC-1832-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCvC-1832-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The originating summons was struck out because the claims relating to the transfer (act dated 27.10.2011) and dismissal (appeal dismissed 17.06.2013) were time barred under PAPA s2(a) and the issues raised could and should have been litigated earlier so are barred by res judicata; accordingly the claim is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of court process and discloses no reasonable cause of action.
22 Nov 2021

Mohd Izzul Faris Mohd Ghani with Sandra Tan Xue Qi for the Applicant [Messrs Syed Ibrahim & Co.] Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal with Arun Ganesh Boopalan for the Respondent [Messrs Raj & Sach]

Citation

POST WINDING UP NO. WA-28PW-158-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

POST WINDING UP NO. WA-28PW-158-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Anton Piller Order obtained 16.3.2021 lapsed automatically on the 21st day (7.4.2021); its execution on 8.4.2021 was therefore unlawful and an abuse of process. Further, an Anton Piller order cannot stand without a pleaded substantive cause of action; PW 68 (and PW 128 as a fishing expedition) were unsustainable on the pleadings and for failure to meet Order 29 safeguards. Relief: motion partly allowed, costs and exemplary damages awarded as set out in orders.
22 Nov 2021

Mohd Izzul Faris Mohd Ghani with Sandra Tan Xue Qi for the Applicant [Messrs Syed Ibrahim & Co.] Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal with Arun Ganesh Boopalan for the Respondent [Messrs Raj & Sach]

Citation

POST WINDING-UP NO. WA-28PW-158-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

POST WINDING-UP NO. WA-28PW-158-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The ex parte Anton Piller order granted on 16.3.2021 had automatically lapsed within 21 days under Order 29 r 2B and its execution on 8.4.2021 was therefore unlawful and an abuse of court process; further, an Anton Piller order cannot be a standalone cause of action absent a substantive pleaded claim, and PW 128 amounted to a fishing expedition and was unsustainable; accordingly the motion was partly allowed with costs and exemplary damages to be assessed.
30 Apr 2021

En. Selvam Shanmugam & En. Surenthiran Raj [Messrs Selvam Shanmugam & Partners] Pn Norazlin Binti Mohamad Yusoff & En. Muhamad Safuan Bin Azhar Deputy Public Prosecutors [Attorney’s General Chambers]

Citation

WA-44-213-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-44-213-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed because (1) secretary's affidavit was competent and absence of chairman's affidavit did not prejudice Applicant; (2) failure to produce minutes did not attract adverse inference on the facts and did not amount to procedural non-compliance under POCA; (3) there was no credible evidence Applicant was a whistleblower or entitled to immunity; and (4) section 15B of POCA bars merits review of the Board's decision so only procedural defects could invalidate detention and none were established.

Malaysia Case Law

Nor'isham Bin Manap PENGARAH POLITEKNIK SULTAN SALAHUDDIN ABDUL AZIZ SHAH

Mohd Izzul Faris Mohd Ghani with Sandra Tan Xue Qi for the Applicant [Messrs Syed Ibrahim & Co.] Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal with Arun Ganesh Boopalan for the Respondent [Messrs Raj & Sach]

Mohd Izzul Faris Mohd Ghani with Sandra Tan Xue Qi for the Applicant [Messrs Syed Ibrahim & Co.] Sachpreetraj Singh Sohanpal with Arun Ganesh Boopalan for the Respondent [Messrs Raj & Sach]

En. Selvam Shanmugam & En. Surenthiran Raj [Messrs Selvam Shanmugam & Partners] Pn Norazlin Binti Mohamad Yusoff & En. Muhamad Safuan Bin Azhar Deputy Public Prosecutors [Attorney’s General Chambers]