Blog

Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC

Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC: “[94] Crucially, throughout the period of negotiation for renewal of the tenancies, the appellant accepted tenders of rent from the respondents without any complaint and did not issue any notice to quit, not … Continue reading Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC

Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC

Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC: “[88] The legislative scheme of s 28(4) (a) of the Civil Law Act is clearly to give the landlord the right of option to charge double rent if the tenant fails or refuses to … Continue reading Rohasassets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Wisma Perkasa Sdn Bhd) v Weatherford (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 1 MLJ 557 FC

Macro Prosperity Sdn Bhd v. Cimb Bank Bhd [2017] 1 CLJ 708 MT

Macro Prosperity Sdn Bhd v. Cimb Bank Bhd [2017] 1 CLJ 708 MT: “[45] This court cannot agree with the submission of the plaintiff that this provision means the plaintiff is entitled to double rental from the defendant for holding over after the expiry or determination of the tenancy. First this is because it was … Continue reading Macro Prosperity Sdn Bhd v. Cimb Bank Bhd [2017] 1 CLJ 708 MT

Dusun Desaru Sdn Bhd & Anor v Wang Ah Yu & Ors [1995] 5 MLJ 449 HC

Dusun Desaru Sdn Bhd & Anor v Wang Ah Yu & Ors [1995] 5 MLJ 449 HC: ... Now, from my understanding of the law, the veil of privilege may be waived, but both parties must consent to the waiver (Theodoropoulas o Theodoropoulas [1963] P 311). But a caveat must be lodged. There is always … Continue reading Dusun Desaru Sdn Bhd & Anor v Wang Ah Yu & Ors [1995] 5 MLJ 449 HC

Malayan Banking Bhd. v. Foo See Moi [1981] 2 MLJ 17 FC

Malayan Banking Bhd. v. Foo See Moi [1981] 2 MLJ 17 FC: It is settled law that letters written without prejudice are inadmissible in evidence of the negotiations attempted. This is in order not to fetter but to enlarge the scope of the negotiations, so that a solution acceptable to both sides can be more … Continue reading Malayan Banking Bhd. v. Foo See Moi [1981] 2 MLJ 17 FC

Telekom Cellular Sdn Bhd (Formerly Known As MRCB Telecommunications Sdn Bhd) v Kabelect Sdn Bhd [2000] 3 MLJ 254 CA

Telekom Cellular Sdn Bhd (Formerly Known As MRCB Telecommunications Sdn Bhd) v Kabelect Sdn Bhd [2000] 3 MLJ 254 CA: “... It has always been the fundamental feature of our judicial system that the courts do only decide issues that are alive; not dead or those that have become hypothetical or only of academic importance. … Continue reading Telekom Cellular Sdn Bhd (Formerly Known As MRCB Telecommunications Sdn Bhd) v Kabelect Sdn Bhd [2000] 3 MLJ 254 CA

Innab Salil & Ors v Verve Suites Mont’ Kiara Management Corp [2020] 12 MLJ 16 FC

“[54] The law on what constitutes a lease, tenancy exempt from registration or a licence is very much trite. Learned authors Teo Keang Sood and Khaw Lake Tee in their acclaimed treatise Land Law in Malaysia Cases and Commentaries (3rd Edition, LexisNexis 2012) ('Teo and Khaw') have this to say at p 353: A lease is … Continue reading Innab Salil & Ors v Verve Suites Mont’ Kiara Management Corp [2020] 12 MLJ 16 FC