This case highlights the effect of an unless order for discovery and whether a court is bound to enter a default judgment containing declaratory relief purely due to non-compliance with such an order. The Federal Court was required to determine whether declaratory relief may be granted without consideration of the merits or supporting evidence, and whether an unless order can operate in the same manner as a summary judgment or judgment in default, particularly in proceedings involving the government.
Written by Farah Aqila Background The Court of Appeal has delivered a significant decision reining in the Industrial Court’s power to join or substitute non-employer companies in employment disputes. The ruling firmly restores the primacy…
The respondent, Ting Siu Hua, was appointed as a promoter or junket by the Huang Group, which operated arrangements with the Naga Casino in Cambodia. As a junket promoter, the respondent was entitled to commissions for bringing in affluent players, primarily from Sarawak to gamble at the casino. In early 2015, the respondent organised a two-day gambling trip for the appellant, Dato’ Ting Ching Lee, and four other individuals. At the appellant’s request, Huang Group extended credit facilities amounting to USD1.5 million and a rolling rebate of USD193,800 to enable gambling at the casino.
Following the trip, the appellant alleged that the respondent wrote and published or caused to be written or published defamatory statements in local Chinese newspapers and on social media alleging that the appellant and two other individuals owed gambling debts to the Huang Group. This led to a defamation suit filed by the appellant and the others against the respondent. The respondent counterclaimed, seeking recovery of the credit facilities extended for gambling form the appellant.
An exhausted cabin crew member vents on Instagram. A screenshot travels. A dismissal letter follows. Two years later, the Industrial Court delivers a reminder: private frustration is not gross misconduct that warrants dismissal.
The case arose when Sri Sanjeevan, after being detained under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (‘the POCA’), obtained a writ of habeas corpus on grounds that his detention contravened mandatory procedural requirements. The High Court found in his favour, and he sought damages for false imprisonment, arguing that the habeas corpus order proved the wrongful nature of his detention. However, his victory in the High Court was overturned by the Court of Appeal, leading to the present Federal Court appeal.
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has been around for many years and as the name suggests has often been used as an alternative to traditional litigation.
In this article, we write about the various types of injunction and what kind of ‘stop order’ each entails. In general, an interlocutory injunction is usually sought for and granted when there is an urgency to the matter. This can be obtained ex parte which means ‘by one party’.
Written by Richard Wee, Fatin Ismail, Nurul Athirah Ja’afar and Tai Sher Lynn Introduction In 2020, The Royal Malaysia Police (“PDRM”) announced that the offence of using mobile phones whilst on the road is a…
By Darren Lai and Kimberly Chan Assisted by Sai Ganesh In our previous chapters, we discussed the general process of initiating a suit and the rules on pleadings in Part 1, Judgments in Default and…
Written by Richard Wee and Fatin Ismail The new amendment for the Penal Code went through the first reading on 4 April 2023. The Bill seeks to amend the Penal Code to substitute and remove certain sections in…
