Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Audi alteram partem

Legal area

Court

25 Feb 2026

1. ) LOYAL SYNERGY SDN BHD 2. ) loyal synerg sdn bhd Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Timur Laut

Citation

P-01(A)-372-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

P-01(A)-372-06/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The appeal was allowed because the High Court relied substantially on assessors' written opinions that were not made available to the parties prior to judgment, constituting non-compliance with section 40C and a breach of procedural fairness as required by article 13 and Tegas Sejati; accordingly the High Court judgment was set aside and the matter remitted for rehearing.
29 Aug 2025

Professor Dato' Dr. Mohd Fauzi Bin Ramlan 1. ) Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) 2. ) JAWATANKUASA RAYUAN TATATERTIB, UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA 3. ) MENTERI PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA

Citation

W-01(A)-375-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-375-07/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The DAC’s appeal process was procedurally unfair because witnesses’ evidence (including exculpatory evidence from the former Legal Adviser) was taken and considered without the appellant being present and without affording him an opportunity to know, challenge or rebut that evidence; the DAC therefore failed to cure earlier investigatory defects and its decision was vitiated by a fundamental breach of audi alteram partem; accordingly the DAC decision dated 23 July 2019 is quashed and the appellant is reinstated with consequential reliefs.
14 May 2025

OCK M&E SDN BHD 1. ) SERI MUTIARA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 2. ) LIM TIAN HUAT 3. ) CHIANG TENG GUAN

Citation

BA-24NCC-130-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCC-130-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Claim dismissed because the subject units were conclusively charged under the Specific Debenture in favour of Malaysian Trustee Berhad who held a prior first fixed charge and had the right to be heard; plaintiff had not properly structured the proceeding (failure to name MTB and initial failure to obtain s471 leave), and the relief sought could not be granted in the absence of MTB given the priority of its security and the constraints of privity of contract.
14 Oct 2024

DATUK TANG CHAI YOONG 1. ) FOO WAH CHEK didakwa atas kapasitinya sebagai Presiden Persatuan Hainan Selangor Dan Wiilayah Persekutuan 2. ) TAN KUAN FENG didakwa atas kapasitinya sebagai Naib Setiausaha Agung Persatuan Hainan Selangor Dan Wil

Citation

WA-24NCvC-2272-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-2272-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

s40 of the Societies Act applied and the Plaintiff failed to exhaust prescribed domestic remedies; the Association's Constitution vested final disciplinary authority in the Executive Committee and General Council so the DC's findings were advisory; the suspension and subsequent EGM expulsion were within constitutional powers and there was no breach of natural justice, therefore the court dismissed the Originating Summons.
25 Aug 2023

SHEILA SHARON A/P STEVEN KUMAR

Citation

BA-43-32-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-43-32-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court exercised its s323 KTJ revisionary jurisdiction to correct a glaring error where the Magistrate had ordered an acquittal notwithstanding the prosecution's position that the matter arose from duplicate filing and prosecution sought discharge without acquittal; the acquittal was legally inappropriate in those circumstances, so the Magistrate's order was set aside and replaced with a discharge without acquittal to preserve prosecutorial discretion and to avoid inconsistent outcomes while respecting double jeopardy principles.
10 Jul 2023

GAN BOON AUN [ ]

Citation

W-09(H)-26-02/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

W-09(H)-26-02/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Notice of appeal was not personally served on appellant and s.314(1) was not complied with; s.314(2) cannot be used to justify making an order adverse to an absent respondent; High Court erred in enhancing sentence to 24 months in appellant's absence; High Court order of 25.1.2022 is null and void and is set aside; Sessions Court sentence restored.
28 Sept 2021

MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD (COMPANY NO: 200701029411/787435-M) 1. ) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. ) MOHD KHAIRUDDIN BIN RAMLI (NO K/P: 710226-08-5913)

Citation

AA-42(ORS)-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ORS
Case number

AA-42(ORS)-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Gazettal under s41(2) MACC Act constituted valid service and the bank had the legal duty and burden to come forward and prove it was a purchaser in good faith; having failed to do so within the statutory period and having shown indolence, the Sessions Court correctly made the forfeiture order and this Court refused to extend time or set aside the order; appeal dismissed.
22 Aug 2021

BIMACH POWERHOUSE SDN. BHD. SANIZAL BIN MAHAMAD

Citation

JB-16-7-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-16-7-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Appellant failed to conduct the statutory 'due inquiry' mandated by s.14(1) Employment Act; a mere show cause letter is not a substitute for a due domestic inquiry and the failure breached natural justice (audi alteram partem); the Director-General's finding and award of RM5,000 compensation in lieu of notice is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed.
27 Jun 2021

ACACIA INDUSTRIES (KELANTAN) SDN. BHD. ERWIRA AEZA BIN MOHAMAT ZAFIRU

Citation

DA-16-4-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-16-4-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Labour Officer's finding that the employer's summary dismissal was tainted by illegality because the employee was not afforded an opportunity to explain a potentially reasonable excuse under s15(2) Employment Act 1955; audi alteram partem applies in this context, rendering the dismissal wrongful and entitling the employee to wages in lieu of notice and termination benefits; appeal dismissed.
22 Jun 2021

1. ZULIAHA BINTI SELAMAT 2. NOOR AMALI BIN SELAMAT 1. MAJLIS AMANAH RAKYAT 2. LAND ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE DISTRICT OF BATU PAHAT, JOHOR

Citation

JB-24NCVC-332-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-24NCVC-332-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Order for Sale dated 13 October 2020 was set aside because the appellants were not afforded the opportunity to be heard at the Land Administrator's enquiry (breach of audi alteram partem) and the alleged RM33,000 payment was not proven; procedural irregularity in affidavit filing was dismissed as not causing substantial injustice.