Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Appeal rights

Legal area

Court

2 Jan 2026

KARTHIGEYEN A/L JAGANNATHA GOUNDAR NATHAN 1. ) BEH ENG LAI (ACP) PENGERUSI LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA, IBU PEJABAT POLIS KONTINJEN KUALA LUMPUR 2. ) LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA, KUALA LUMPUR 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

WA-25-459-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-459-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the application fails: Reg 28 did not apply because the applicant was not interdicted; Reg 30 did not bar the disciplinary process because no criminal proceedings were pending and the disciplinary charges constituted distinct misconduct; the Disciplinary Board was validly constituted; the absence of a statutory right of appeal for police officers does not breach Articles 5, 8 or 135(2); accordingly certiorari and declarations were refused and the judicial review dismissed.
9 Aug 2021

Malayan Banking Berhad 1. ) Mahkamah Perusahaan Malaysia 2. ) Mohd Shamsul Kamal Bin Mahmood @ Mahmud

Citation

WA-25-339-11-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-339-11-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

High Court dismissed the judicial review application, holding the Industrial Court did not commit illegality or plain irrationality: the Industrial Court properly evaluated credibility and evidence, legitimately found absence of dishonest intent and procedural unfairness by the employer (failure to exhaust contractual appeal and to refer to Group Staff Committee or hold independent domestic inquiry), and properly awarded 24 months backwages under the IRA.
14 Dec 2020

Tegas Sejati Sdn Bhd Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat

Citation

BA-15-173-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-15-173-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

LLM has locus standi to file Form N and challenge the Land Administrator's award under the pre-amendment Land Acquisition Act 1960 s37(3) as a corporation undertaking work of public utility; TSSB's Form N was confined to land value only because its second ground lacked the required specific pleading; comparable method valuation yields a fair market value of RM2,500/m2 (total RM13,617,500), and all other claimed items (preliminary works beyond earthworks, termination costs, site replacement, loss of profit, duplicate valuation fees) were either outside TSSB's pleaded ambit or not proved on the…
14 Dec 2020

Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat

Citation

BA-15-186-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-15-186-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Under the pre-amendment Land Acquisition Act 1960 the deeming provision s.37(3) conferred locus standi on LLM as a corporation undertaking a public utility to object and appeal; defects in Enclosure 48 were curable; TSSB's Form N lacked specificity except as to land value so its reference was limited to land value only; comparable method produced fair market value RM2,500/m2 (total RM13,617,500) and all other special claims were either not pleaded, not proven on balance of probabilities or legally subsumed in market value, hence the Land Administrator's award reduced to RM13,617,500 and other…

Malaysia Case Law

KARTHIGEYEN A/L JAGANNATHA GOUNDAR NATHAN 1. ) BEH ENG LAI (ACP) PENGERUSI LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA, IBU PEJABAT POLIS KONTINJEN KUALA LUMPUR 2. ) LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA, KUALA LUMPUR 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Malayan Banking Berhad 1. ) Mahkamah Perusahaan Malaysia 2. ) Mohd Shamsul Kamal Bin Mahmood @ Mahmud

Tegas Sejati Sdn Bhd Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat

Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat