In Ross v Garvey, the co-owner brothers Matthew and Kyle Garvey listed their property for sale and negotiated directly with Daniel Ross, a realtor and developer. After rejecting Ross’s initial offer, Kyle emailed a ‘counter-offer’ from the brothers’ shared email account, attaching an amended version of the standard-form contract but without any signatures. Ross immediately accepted by email, signed the documents electronically, and Kyle responded with a thumbs-up emoji in a text message. The next day, Matthew intervened, stating he had neither reviewed nor approved the documents and that nothing had been signed. The Garveys later sold the property to third parties. Ross brought a legal action against the Garveys, arguing that the emailed counteroffer and the thumbs-up emoji via text message formed a binding contract.
The respondent was a registered manufacturer under the Sales Tax (Persons Exempted From Payment Of Tax) Order 2018. However, as a franchise holder of locally assembled manufacturer for motorcycles (both below and above 250cc), the respondent was not eligible to claim for the exemption under PU(A) 210.
AIAC officially unveiled their AIAC Suite of Rules 2026 during Asia ADR Week in October 2025. The suite of rules is a comprehensive update to its institutional dispute-resolution framework, designed to be effective from 1 January 2026. This new suite spans multiple sets of rules covering arbitration, mediation, adjudication and domain-name disputes which represents a deliberate recalibration of the AIAC’s procedural architecture to align with global best practices, evolving market demands and Malaysia’s legislative context.
在任何以消费者为对象的商业经营环境中(例如零售业、酒店业或餐饮业),顾客与经营者之间的接触点,无论是在柜台、服务过程中或送餐时,往往左右整体消费体验。顾客自然期望获得令人满意的服务、合格的产品及公平的对待。如对相关事项感到不满,顾客有权提出质疑、要求澄清,或通过正规渠道提出正式投诉。本文旨在探讨消费者在维护其权利时可采取的正当行为,以及企业在交易出现问题时可采取的应对措施。
In any business operating in a customer-facing setting (such as retail, hospitality or food and beverage), the point of contact between customer and operator, whether at the counter, during service, or upon delivery, can often make or break the customer experience. Customers naturally expect satisfactory service, quality products, and fair treatment. Where they are dissatisfied, they have the right to raise concerns, request clarifications, or lodge formal complaints through proper channels. This article looks into both sides of the coin where it examines what the customer can do in protecting their rights and what businesses can do in the event a transaction goes awry.
Globally, eCommerce fraud is escalating, and Malaysia is no exception. In 2024 alone the Royal Malaysia Police logged 35,368 cybercrime cases tied to online scams, and in just the first three months of 2025 we’re already at 12,110 cases with losses totalling RM 573.7 million. Legal protections such as the Contracts Act 1950, Consumer Protection Act 1999 and the Penal Code attempt to cover the issue, but as of today, there’s no single, dedicated act governing eCommerce fraud. Meanwhile, Singapore and Australia have taken steps to curb scams with the Singaporean Technical Reference 76 and the Australian Scam Prevention Framework.
A case study on the Federal Court case of Lim Swee Choo & Chiam Eng Huat @ Chiam Eng Hong v Ong Koh Hou and another appeal.
The Electricity Supply (Amendment) Bill 2025 was passed at the Dewan Rakyat on 30 July 2025. It was subsequently passed by the Dewan Negara on 9 September 2025. The Bill contains several key insertions and amendments which in essence provides for the importation and exportation of electricity as well as the introduction of ‘green attributes’.
eCommerce in Malaysia is primarily given legal recognition by the Electronic Commerce Act 2006 (‘ECA 2006’). The ECA 2006 facilitates electronic transactions by recognising the legal validity of electronic messages, documents, and contracts. It broadly covers ‘commercial transactions’ conducted via electronic means, encompassing the supply or exchange of goods or services.
While Malaysian law does not explicitly mention the ‘Metaverse’, many of its activities share the same fundamental characteristics as eCommerce.
The Review of eCommerce Legislation Final Report (Laporan Akhir Kajian Semakan Semula Perundangan eDagang) (‘the report’) represents a major national effort to modernise, refresh and renew the legal and regulatory framework for online commerce in Malaysia. Led by the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Cost of Living (‘KPDN’) with input from over 90 stakeholders, the report provides a comprehensive evaluation of existing eCommerce laws, identifies key enforcement and consumer protection gaps, and sets out a structured plan for reform. Richard Wee Chambers (a member of Grandall Law Firm) are the legal advisors in this Review of eCommerce Legislation.
