Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Admissibility of statutory declaration

Legal area

Court

6 Oct 2022

AARON CHONG CHERNLIN [ ]

Citation

B-05(M)-112-02/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-112-02/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction because the trial judge permissibly found the appellant had custody and control of the apartment and the box containing 379.7g methamphetamine, validly invoked the statutory presumption under s.37(d) DDA 1952 which the defence failed to rebut on the balance of probabilities, found the statutory declaration inadmissible/weightless as maker did not testify, found no material break in chain of custody, and concluded there was no prejudice from the prosecution not calling Chuah Bee Leong such as to invoke s.114(g).
20 Nov 2019

Yogananthy a/p A.S. Thambaiya Harta Pusaka Idris bin Osman

Citation

02(f)-25-04/2018(J) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

02(f)-25-04/2018(J) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The Federal Court affirmed the findings of the High Court and Court of Appeal that the tripartite agreement (which subsumed the 1987 statutory declaration) was a sham designed to conceal the real contracting party and to enable conflict‑of‑interest profiteering; the agreement was therefore void and unenforceable as being opposed to public policy under section 24(e) of the Contracts Act 1950, the appellant lacked a sustainable claim on the proven facts, and the courts below were not plainly wrong.