2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Cases

PEMUNGUT DUIT SETEM v. LEE KOY ENG & ANOTHER APPEAL
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Rohana Yusuf PCA, Hasnah Mohmmed Hashim, Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJJ
[Civil Appeal No: 01(f)-9-07-2021(B) & Judicial Review Application No: 08(R)-2-02/2022(B)]
7 July 2022
[2022] 6 MLRA 209

JUDGMENT

Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJ:

[1] On 28 June 2021, the appellant was granted leave to appeal after the Federal Court was satisfied that the three questions posed met the threshold requirements set out in s 96(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 [Act 91]. On 18 October 2021, a separate panel of the Federal Court in granting leave to appeal to the same appellant before us in respect of Pemungut Duti Setem, UTC Johor Bahru v. Ku Ek Mei [Civil Application No: 08(f)-247-09/2020 (J)] [second appeal] ordered that that appeal be heard together with the present appeal. In that appeal, the following threshold question was allowed together with several other questions:

Stamp Act 1949

Whether the High Court in hearing the appeal by way of case stated pursuant to s 39 of the Stamp Act 1949 is exercising its original or appellate jurisdiction.

CASE HIGHLIGHTS

PRESS METAL SARAWAK SDN BHD v. ETIQA TAKAFUL BERHAD
Federal Court, Putrajaya
2016] 5 MLRA 529
[Civil Appeal No: 02(i)-27-04-2015(W)]
15 August 2016 [+]
TAN POOI YEE v. KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN NEGARA
High Court Malaya, Kuala Lumpur
[2016] 5 MLRH 501
24NCVC-1306-08-2015
18 July 2016 [+]
ILANGOVAN KRISHNAN v. SHIYA SDN BHD
Industrial Court, Johor
[2016] 2 MELR 374
16/4-157/15
27 April 2016 [+]
JanuaryFebruaryJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember