Blog

Damansara Realty Bhd v Bungsar Hill Holdings Sdn Bhd & Anor [2011] 6 MLJ 464 FC: [67] A passage from Civil Remedies in Malaysia may make the point clearer where the learned author states the following at p 14: It has been explained that '[a] contract is a contract from the time it is made, … Continue reading Damansara Realty Bhd v Bungsar Hill Holdings Sdn Bhd & Anor [2011] 6 MLJ 464 FC →

Development & Commercial Bank Berhad v. Aspatra Corporation Sdn. Bhd. & Anor. [1996] 1 CLJ 141 FC: "A person cannot approbate and reprobate, so that if a person becomes aware of an irregularity of service and then subsequently takes a further step in the action which could be only useful if the service had been … Continue reading Development & Commercial Bank Berhad v. Aspatra Corporation Sdn. Bhd. & Anor. [1996] 1 CLJ 141 FC →

KELANA MEGAH DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD v. KERAJAAN NEGERI JOHOR & ANOTHER APPEAL [2016] 8 CLJ 804: "[21] Reference in this connection may be made to the case of Bato Bagi & Ors v. Kerajaan Negeri Sarawak & Another Appeal [2011] 8 CLJ 766; [2011] 6 MLJ 297. In that case, the Federal Court cited with … Continue reading KELANA MEGAH DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD v. KERAJAAN NEGERI JOHOR & ANOTHER APPEAL [2016] 8 CLJ 804 →

Cheah Theam Kheng v City Centre Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) and other appeals [2012] 1 MLJ 761 CA: "[105] We categorically say that the liquidator cannot blow hot and cold to suit him whenever he feels like it. He cannot approbate and reprobate in the same breath. On the one hand, he claims that the … Continue reading Cheah Theam Kheng v City Centre Sdn Bhd (in liquidation) and other appeals [2012] 1 MLJ 761 CA →

“Engineers can determine the cause of a bridge collapse because there’s agreement that if a certain amount of force is applied to a certain area, that area will break. Physics isn’t controversial. It’s guided by laws. Finance is different. It’s guided by people’s behaviors. And how I behave might make sense to me but look … Continue reading QOTD →

Karthiyayani v Lee Liong Sin [1975] 1 MLJ 119 at p 120D-F: If a witness is independent, ie, if he has no interest in the success or failure of a case and his evidence inspires confidence of the court, such evidence can be acted upon. A witness is normally to be considered independent unless he … Continue reading Karthiyayani v Lee Liong Sin [1975] 1 MLJ 119 →

“Yet if you look at the way humans are designed to learn, we learn by making mistakes. We learn to walk by falling down. If we never fell down, we would never walk. The same is true for learning to ride a bike. I still have scars on my knees, but today I can ride … Continue reading QOTD →

Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL): To my mind nothing would be more absolutely unjust then not to cross examine witnesses upon evidence which they have given so as to give them notice, and to give them an opportunity of explanation and an opportunity very often to defend their own character

Barry v Butlin 2 Moo PC 480: The rules of law according to which cases of this nature are to be decided do not admit of any dispute so far as they are necessary to the determination of the present appeal, and they have been acquiesced in on both sides. These rules are two: The … Continue reading Barry v Butlin 2 Moo PC 480 →

Dr Shanmuganathan v Periasamy [1997] 3 MLJ 61: We consider it to be a well established general guide to the judicial appreciation of handwriting evidence that where there is a sharp conflict between the direct testimony of a disinterested witness on the one side and that of a handwriting expert on the other as to … Continue reading Dr Shanmuganathan v Periasamy [1997] 3 MLJ 61 →