Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Reinstatement

Legal area

Court

19 Jan 2026

SITI SUHANA BINTI SUID 1. ) Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia 2. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

WA-25-19-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-25-19-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the applicant failed to establish illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety: the PSC show cause was properly particularised and premised on a prima facie case, not the JPJ decision; alleged predetermination was misconstrued; inclusion of weekends/public holidays did not invalidate the charge; no duty arose to furnish documents absent a request; the delay was not inordinate and delay alone does not amount to condonation; mitigation and an express duty to give reasons are not mandated by the 1993 Regulations in the circumstances; proportionality of punishment is for the…
8 Dec 2025

CHANDRA A/L SUBRAMANIAM 1. ) Sambath Rao A/l Perumal 2. ) Katigesu A/l Sinnapan 3. ) Rasa Selvan A/l Karuppiah 4. ) Jabatan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan Selangor

Citation

BA-23NCvC-8-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-23NCvC-8-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The expulsions and removals were nullities because the Management Committee failed to follow the mandatory disciplinary procedure (Article 5) and disregarded the Registrar's finding that the first expulsion was irregular; consequence is reinstatement to membership and office, appointment of defendant 2 during the period is void, and defendants 1-3 are jointly liable for general damages and costs for wrongful repeated expulsions executed in bad faith.
2 Sept 2025

HR MUSIC WORLD SDN BHD 1. ) EILEEN TAN EE LIN 2. ) BEH JENG KOOI

Citation

WA-22NCvC-367-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-367-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court held that the Plaintiff company was struck off and dissolved (gazetted 5.5.2023) and, absent an order of reinstatement under Companies Act 2016 s.555, lacked legal capacity and locus standi to maintain the suit; the relevant facts were undisputed so the legal question was suitable for determination under Order 14A/Order 33 and the Amended Writ and Amended Statement of Claim (Encl.45) were struck out and the counterclaim struck out; trial dates vacated; each party to bear own costs.
15 Jul 2025

MOHD IBRAHIM BIN SALLEH ZURICH TAKAFUL MALAYSIA BERHAD

Citation

WA-24NCC-21-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCC-21-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the Defendant's notices were wrongful because the Plaintiff paid the contractual RM1500 monthly contributions and did not agree to any increase; withdrawals from the PIA do not of themselves trigger lapse of the basic certificate absent non-payment of the contractual contribution and a zero or negative PIA after the grace period; the Defendant had no contractual right to unilaterally increase contributions or to treat the whole policies as lapsed based solely on reduced PIA balances; consequently the notices were void and the policies must be reinstated.
12 Jun 2025

MTRUSTEE BERHAD 1. ) PERSONAL BANC BERHAD 2. ) DATUK MURUGAN A/L SUPPARAMANIAM

Citation

WA-B52NCvC-543-11/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52NCvC-543-11/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiff met the requirements for summary judgment; defendants' alleged oral termination and set-off defences were unparticularised, inconsistent with the written agreements (which bar oral amendments), lacking precision and inherently improbable, therefore no triable issues existed and summary judgment was entered for the plaintiff on the claims in paragraphs 1(a)–(d) of the originating application.
29 May 2025

Chang Chuen Hwa South Island Plastics Sdn Bhd

Citation

PA-16A-2-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-16A-2-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The claimant was properly found to be a 'workman' under the Industrial Relations Act and therefore subject to the Minimum Retirement Age Act 2012 which mandates retirement at 60; statutory retirement cannot be waived by conduct, reinstatement was impossible as the claimant was over 60 when the Award was delivered, and therefore no compensation in lieu of reinstatement was awardable; appeal dismissed and Industrial Court decision affirmed.
27 May 2025

Ong Show Sik AIA HEALTH SERVICES SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-B52NCvC-214-05/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52NCvC-214-05/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court exercised its discretion under Order 35 to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for non‑attendance because the plaintiff was absent and could not be contacted despite attempts; reinstatement requires a formal filed application (with affidavit) to which the defendant must be given opportunity to respond; costs for defendant's attendance were awarded (RM500).
15 Apr 2025

1. ) MEOR AHMAD KUSHIRY BIN MEOR OTHMAN 2. ) NORMAH BINTI AMAT 3. ) NURUL AINI FAZILLAH BINTI AHMAD TAUFIK 4. ) MUHAMMAD HAFIZ BIN YA'COB 5. ) SITI HASYAFIZA BINTI YA'COB 6. ) HAMIMAH BINTI ABDUL HAMID 7. ) NORAZAH BINTI ABD WAHID 8. ) MOHD

Citation

WA-B52-31-06/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-B52-31-06/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiffs failed to apply to set aside the existing strike-out order under Order 34 r.2(4) ROC 2012 and twice failed to comply with pre-trial directions; the strike-out order therefore remains effective and the court will not reinstate the writ; the correct procedural route is to seek setting aside of the strike-out order; accordingly the reinstatement application is dismissed with costs.
23 Oct 2024

FOO JIN KEAT 1. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) MSM PRAI BERHAD

Citation

PA-16A-10-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-16A-10-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Industrial Court's finding that the claimant failed to prove the company breached the employment contract or evinced an intention to be no longer bound by it; the claimant further failed to return to work as per the Memorandum of Agreement and thus abandoned employment. Therefore there was no constructive dismissal; the appeal is dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.
24 Jul 2024

Conweld Engineering Sdn Bhd 1. ) Low Terk Chen 2. ) Low Man Fook 3. ) NG WAM WOOI PIHAK KETIGA 1. ) Goh Swee Boh @ Goh Cheng Kin 2. ) Goh Tze Chien PIHAK TERKILAN GOH TZE CHIEN

Citation

WA-22NCC-108-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-108-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court exercised its discretion to set aside the striking out order and reinstate the suit because the plaintiff provided an honest and genuine explanation for the delay, demonstrated sincere efforts to obtain and retain representation and committed to comply with future directions; the derivative nature of the action and previously granted and affirmed leave weighed in favour of allowing the plaintiff its day in court, with delay to be remedied by costs if appropriate.