Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Delegation of powers

Legal area

Court

17 Dec 2025

MOHAMED AMINUDEEN BIN ABDUL HAMID 1. ) MENTERI KEWANGAN MALAYSIA 2. ) BANK NEGARA MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 4. ) Resolution Alliance Sdn. Bhd 5. ) Malayan Banking Berhad

Citation

WA-25-88-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-88-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed: filed outside permissible period (time-bar evident from Applicant's earlier affidavits and pleadings), statutory immunity protects MoF/Government/BNM for acts done in good faith, Blanket Approval lawful given s118 Exemption Order, BNM's role and Guidelines justified approval process, no procedural impropriety or Wednesbury irrationality proven, relief would be futile and public interest and res judicata bar relief.
25 Feb 2025

1. ) DATUK ROGER TAN KOR MEE PENGERUSI JAWATANKUASA TATATERTIB KUMPULAN PENGURUSAN TERTINGGI DAN EKSEKUTIF (TUJUAN BUANG BUANG KERJA ATAU TURUN PANGKAT) SURUHANJAYA PERKHIDMATAN AIR NEGARA (SPAN) 2. ) DATUK LIANG TECK MENG PENGERUSI JAWATAN

Citation

W-01(A)-189-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-189-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent's unauthorised disclosures of confidential legal opinions, made before any management retreat approval, constituted a serious breach of statutory secrecy and the trust inherent in her senior legal director role; affidavits challenged were admissible and section 17 did not preclude officers from affirming affidavits in employment disputes; any procedural impropriety (presence of investigator) did not justify certiorari because the court was satisfied the dismissal was the correct substantive outcome, so the appeal was allowed and High Court orders q…
29 May 2024

SIAK SIONG CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 1. ) AJ CORP SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) 2. ) Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) 3. ) SELANGOR INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION SDN BHD PENCELAH DICADANGKAN Lim Yi Sheng

Citation

BA-22NCvC-644-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-644-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the Companies Act 2016 and authorities do not expressly confer on a court-appointed liquidator the power to sanction the bringing of suit in the name of a wound-up company without the winding-up court's approval, the sanction relied on was ineffective; further, the termination letter signed by the Chief Executive Officer of PKNS, rather than the Dato' Menteri Besar as mandated by the contract, was invalid, and therefore the plaintiff's suit could not proceed and was struck off.
13 Sept 2022

AMIRUL NAZRAF BIN MOHD KASBOLLAH 1. ) TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA 2. ) Penguasa Kanan Pusat Pemulihan Akhlak Simpang Renggam 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

BA-44-179-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-44-179-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the detention order was procedurally defective in multiple material respects — the grounds failed to establish that applicant was part of a 'substantial body of persons' as required by Article 149 and the Act; the factual particulars contained a material defect about the place; removal/production to court lacked proven delegated authority under section 16; and detention exceeding 30 days at Dang Wangi lock‑up lacked proof of ministerial authorization under the Prison Act — those procedural failures rendered the detention unlawful and justified issuance of a writ of ha…
14 Apr 2022

EKOVEST CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL SDN. BHD.) 1. ) Choo Teik Shiong 2. ) GOH SEE KWONG 3. ) NG YIN CHING 4. ) YAP PEI LEE 5. ) TAN SUET FONG 6. ) YAP CHEE WEE

Citation

WA-12ANCvC-340-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCvC-340-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Summary judgment was inappropriate because the developer demonstrated at least two triable issues: (1) whether the plaintiffs are estopped by the SPAs and prior settlement agreements (and whether allowing plaintiffs to recover further LAD would produce unjust enrichment), and (2) whether the settlement agreements' clear wording precludes additional claims. Other defences (limitation, wrong mode, parol evidence, representative action, refundable payments) were either rejected or held non-triable on the facts. Accordingly the Order 14 judgment was set aside and the developer granted leave to de…
10 Feb 2022

En. Sharvin Nair Yasodharan (Tetuan Sharvin & Associates) En. Muhammad bin Sinti, En. Zulkpli bin Abdullah, En. Nuur Izham bin Ismail, En. Muhammad Idzwan bin Ishak & Pn. Farasyeriza binti Mohd. Zabani (Timbalan - Jabatan Peguam Negara

Citation

WA-44-122-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-44-122-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found no merit in the Applicant's challenges: evidence showed the Applicant understood Bahasa Malaysia so lack of Mandarin interpreter did not vitiate the Inquiry Officer's report; delays of 22 and 14 days were not inordinate given the circumstances and absence of prescribed regulations and were factually justified; conduct of the Advisory Board chairman did not deny a fair hearing and minutes were properly withheld under Section 14 and Article 151(3); production to Magistrates Court was lawful under delegated authority and Section 16 was not contravened. Therefore the detaining authori…
20 Apr 2021

Puncak Niaga Construction Sdn. Bhd Menteri Kewangan Malaysia

Citation

WA-25-357-12-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-357-12-2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application to intervene was dismissed because the matters in dispute concern the exclusive discretionary powers of the Minister under s127(3A) and s135 ITA; the Proposed Intervener (DGIR) failed to demonstrate a direct interest or involvement in the Minister's decision-making and thus is not a proper person to intervene at the leave stage, making the intervention premature and unnecessary at that threshold.

Malaysia Case Law

MOHAMED AMINUDEEN BIN ABDUL HAMID 1. ) MENTERI KEWANGAN MALAYSIA 2. ) BANK NEGARA MALAYSIA 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 4. ) Resolution Alliance Sdn. Bhd 5. ) Malayan Banking Berhad

1. ) DATUK ROGER TAN KOR MEE PENGERUSI JAWATANKUASA TATATERTIB KUMPULAN PENGURUSAN TERTINGGI DAN EKSEKUTIF (TUJUAN BUANG BUANG KERJA ATAU TURUN PANGKAT) SURUHANJAYA PERKHIDMATAN AIR NEGARA (SPAN) 2. ) DATUK LIANG TECK MENG PENGERUSI JAWATAN

SIAK SIONG CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 1. ) AJ CORP SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) 2. ) Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) 3. ) SELANGOR INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION SDN BHD PENCELAH DICADANGKAN Lim Yi Sheng

AMIRUL NAZRAF BIN MOHD KASBOLLAH 1. ) TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA 2. ) Penguasa Kanan Pusat Pemulihan Akhlak Simpang Renggam 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

EKOVEST CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI PROMPT CAPITAL SDN. BHD.) 1. ) Choo Teik Shiong 2. ) GOH SEE KWONG 3. ) NG YIN CHING 4. ) YAP PEI LEE 5. ) TAN SUET FONG 6. ) YAP CHEE WEE

En. Sharvin Nair Yasodharan (Tetuan Sharvin & Associates) En. Muhammad bin Sinti, En. Zulkpli bin Abdullah, En. Nuur Izham bin Ismail, En. Muhammad Idzwan bin Ishak & Pn. Farasyeriza binti Mohd. Zabani (Timbalan - Jabatan Peguam Negara

Puncak Niaga Construction Sdn. Bhd Menteri Kewangan Malaysia