Vignesh Naidu a/l Kuppusamy Naidu v Prema Bonanza Sdn Bhd (and Another Appeal) [2023] 3 AMR 325, CA

Civil procedure – Striking out – Statement of claim – Appeal – Claim for liquidated ascertained damages due to late delivery of vacant possession – Extension of time granted under reg 11(3) of the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 and reflected in sale and purchase agreement – High Court struck out statement of claim – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Whether extension of time valid – Whether claim time-barred – Whether judicial review ought to be filed – Whether Ang Ming Lee & 34 Ors v Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor (and 5 Other Appeals) applied prospectively – Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 – Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989, reg 11(3), Schedule H – Limitation Act 1953, s 6(1)(a) – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14, Order 18 r 19(1), Order 53

Civil procedure – Summary judgment – Appeal – Claim for liquidated ascertained damages due to late delivery of vacant possession – Extension of time granted under reg 11(3) of the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 and reflected in sale and purchase agreement – High Court rejected application for summary judgment – Whether appellate intervention warranted – Whether extension of time valid – Whether claim time-barred – Whether judicial review ought to be filed – Whether Ang Ming Lee & 34 Ors v Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor (and 5 Other Appeals) applied prospectively – Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 – Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989, reg 11(3), Schedule H – Limitation Act 1953, s 6, 6(1)(a) – Rules of Court 2012, Order 14, Order 18 r 19(1), Order 53

Chuah Hee Huat (berniaga di atas nama dan gaya Kim Hor Furniture Trading) v Majlis Bandaraya Seberang Perai [2023] 3 AMR 347, HC

Land law – Demolition or removal of unlawful building – Damages – Notices under s 72(1) of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 ("the Act") served to demolish non-approved building erected on agricultural land – Demolition of building challenged for non-compliance with the Act – Whether notices valid and duly served – Whether plaintiff given reasonable time to vacate building – Whether plaintiff entitled to damages – Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g) – Federal Constitution, Article 5 – Local Government Act 1976 – Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974, ss 72, 72(1)(b), (6), 97, 120

CSM v TCC [2023] 3 AMR 366, HC

Family law – Judicial separation – Petition for – Wife filed for judicial separation seeking custody, care and control of children, maintenance and division of matrimonial assets – Husband filed for dissolution of marriage with similar reliefs sought by wife – Whether marriage had irretrievably broken down – Whether judicial separation or dissolution of marriage ought to be granted – Whether wife entitled to spousal and child maintenance – Whether matrimonial assets ought to be divided equally – Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, ss 51, 52, 76(2), 78, 106(1), (1)(vi)

Industrial Property Management Sdn Bhd v Biaxis (M) Sdn Bhd [2023] 3 AMR 404, HC

Company law – Winding-up – Leave to continue action or proceeding – Monetary claim against wound up company in pending suit for nuisance and negligence – Whether requirements under s 471 of the Companies Act 2016 met for grant of leave – Whether grant of leave breached pari passu principle – Companies Act 2016, s 471

R Tharmarajah a/l Ramasamy v SSL Dev Sdn Bhd [2023] 3 AMR 419, HC

Contract – Breach – Construction contract – Claim for outstanding sum for work done – Whether defendant owed any outstanding sum to plaintiff – Whether defendant held monies received from employer on constructive trust for benefit of plaintiff – Whether plaintiff's claim time barred – Whether claim could be saved by s 22 of the Limitation Act 1953 – Limitation Act 1953, ss 6(1)(a), 22