Member Article

Employment Law

An examination of the case ofTelekom Research andDevelopment Sdn Bhd v Ahmad Farid Bin Abdul Rahman by the Court of Appeal

Introduction

The Industrial Court had ruled that the company, Telekom Research and Development Sdn Bhd (“Telekom”), had proven the misconduct against a former employee, the claimant Ahmad Farid Bin Abdul Rahman (“Ahmad”), and that the dismissal was justified.

However, the High Court quashed the decision of the Industrial Court when it accepted Ahmad’s contention that he had submitted the claim to Telekom by an “innocent mistake”.

Telekom appealed against the decision of the High Court and the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision and affirmed the Industrial Court’s decision. Recently, the Federal Court dismissed Ahmad’s application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court.

Corporate/M&A

Perdana Petroleum Bhd (formerly known as Petra Perdana Bhd) v Tengku Dato’ Ibrahim Petra binTengku Indra Petra: Indemnity for Directors in the Company’s Constitution

Introduction

Could the provisions of a company’s constitution bind third parties such as the company’s directors without the incorporation of such provisions in the terms of employment of its directors?

The recent Court of Appeal decision of Perdana Petroleum Bhd (formerly known as Petra Perdana Bhd) v Tengku Dato’ Ibrahim Petra bin Tengku Indra Petra¹ has provided further clarity on the issue pertaining to whether a company’s constitution alone can give rise to an indemnity from a company in favour of its directors or former directors.

Dispute Resolution

The High Court rejects a challenge against applying a vaccination programme for teenagers — Clarence Ng Chii Wei (Mendakwa Melalui Wakil-Wakil LitigasiNg Kean Pong Dan Wong Shiau Lan) v Menteri Kesihatan [2021] MLJU 2198 (“Clarence Ng Chii Wei”)

Introduction

In September 2021, Malaysia implemented the National Covid-19 Immunisation Programme which aims to vaccinate 3.2 million teenagers aged 12 to 17 (“Program”)¹.

Financial Services

Budget 2022 — Stamp Duty Exemption for Loan/Financing Agreements

Introduction

On 29 October 2021, the Finance Minister, Tengkul Zafrul Aziz, announced Malaysia's Budget 2022 (“Budget”) in Parliament, which builds upon three key pillars — strengthening recovery, building resilience and driving reforms. In line with this, various initiatives and measures have been introduced in the Budget, one of them being stamp duty exemption.

This article will be looking at stamp duty exemption that is related to loan or financing agreements, that is, the extension of stamp duty exemption for rescheduling and restructuring transaction documents and the stamp duty exemption on loan or financing agreements for peer-to-peer (“P2P”) financing.

Intellectual Property

Qi Sheng Sdn Bhd v Foong Yit Meng [2021] MLJU 269

Background facts

The second plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the “Goco Comfort” and “Goco” trademarks under registration nos. 96003868 and 08008365 and the applicant for pending trademark application no. 2018015831, whilst the first and third plaintiffs were authorised by the second plaintiff to use the said Goco Comfort and Goco trademarks. The plaintiffs (“Qi Sheng”) claimed that the Goco Comfort and Goco trademarks are well-known trademarks in the footwear industry.

Tax & Revenue

Tax Highlights of Malaysia’s Budget 2022

Introduction

On 6 November 2021, the Malaysian Minister of Finance, YB Senator Tengku Datuk Seri Utama Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz, unveiled the Malaysian Budget 2022 (“the Budget”) themed “Keluarga Malaysia, Makmur Sejahtera” (‘A Prosperous Malaysian Family’). The Budget’s allocation of RM 322.1 billion is the largest on record for the country¹.