Changes in the last decade such as unprecedented artificial intelligence (AI) technology advancements have led to changes in stakeholder expectations. Businesses are now under constant pressure to develop new products, embrace emerging technologies and respond rapidly to changing customer expectations. In many industries, the greatest risk is no longer innovating too quickly but failing to innovate at all. Today, innovation is no longer a competitive advantage enjoyed by a se

The Guidelines on the Electrical Safety Management Plan (GP/ST/No.63/2026) (ESMP Guidelines), which were issued by the Energy Commission (EC) came into operation on 15 May 2026. Issued under Section 50C of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 (ESA), the ESMP Guidelines apply to holders of generation, transmission and distribution licences. Retail licensees and licensees for private installations fall outside the scope of the Guidelines. Most licensees will already have safety

知识产权通常令人联想到商标、专利或版权等熟悉类别。然而，在食品、农业及与地域文化密切相关的产品领域，一种日益重要的保护形式是地理标志（Geographical Indication，GI）。地理标志用于证明某项产品的品质、特性或声誉与其特定产地具有内在且本质性的联系。 于2022年3月18日生效的《2022年地理标志法》（Geographical Indications Act 2022，下称“GIA 2022”），标志着我国在使其制度更贴近全球实践并加强对区域性产品保障方面的最新努力。该法建立了一个更为结构化的地理标志注册及执行框架。 什么才有资格成为地理标志？ 根据该法，地理标志被定义为一种标识，通常但不一定是名称，用于识别商品来源于特定国家、地区或地方，而该商品的质量或声誉从根本上归因于其地理来源。在实践中，地理标志作为真实性的信号。例如，马来西亚的巴生肉骨茶（Klang Bak Kut The）、砂拉越胡椒（Sarawak Pepper）、柔佛凤梨（Nanas Johor）以及猫山王榴莲（Musang King durian）。

Owners of stratified properties often question why they should pay the same maintenance charges as other parcel owners when they have access to fewer facilities or derive less benefit from the common property. Can a management corporation lawfully impose different maintenance charge rates simply because certain owners enjoy fewer common amenities? The Court of Appeal recently answered this question in the negative in Yong Kein Sin & Anor v Perbadanan Pengurusan Springtide R

The recent High Court decision in Loi Yap Loong v Harald Richard Hemming & Ors [2026] MLJU 1368 serves as an important reminder that commercial transactions must be characterised according to what the parties actually agreed at the time and not according to explanations developed after litigation begins. Rejecting an attempt to retrospectively recast an outright share transfer as a trust, the High Court reaffirmed that ownership recorded in a company's register carries sign

Judicial management is intended to rescue financially distressed companies, not merely postpone their inevitable collapse. By imposing a statutory moratorium and allowing an independent judicial manager to take control of the company, the regime seeks to preserve value while providing breathing space for corporate restructuring. However, corporate rescue inevitably comes at a cost. Once a judicial management application is filed, creditors' enforcement rights are significan

Introduction The recent High Court decision in Mohd Sofian bin Amirudin v Bank Simpanan Nasional [2026] MLJU 1479 serves as an important reminder that an employer's contractual right to transfer employees is not unlimited. Even where an employment contract confers broad transfer powers, the exercise of those powers must remain consistent with the contract and cannot fundamentally alter the employee's position or responsibilities. Beyond clarifying the limits of transfer c

Malaysia has taken a significant step towards positioning itself as a regional carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) hub with the enactment of the Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage Act 2025 (CCUS Act). The accompanying Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (Offshore Permit and Licensing) Regulations 2025 (CCUS Regulations) came into force on 1 October 2025. More than simply introducing a new licensing regime, the legislation establishes the legal certainty

马来西亚采用托伦斯（Torrens）土地登记制度，该制度在确保土地所有权的确定性与安全性方面具有重要意义。该制度的一个关键特征是产权的不可推翻性原则，即除非涉及欺诈或其他法律明文规定足以否定产权的情形，土地产权所登记的所有权人的产权将具有最终性，并受到保护，免受先前未注册的权益的影响。该原则载于《1965年国家土地法典》（National Land Code 1965）（“国家土地法”）第340条，旨在确保土地交易的清晰性与确定性。托伦斯制度的运作基础在于：由土地局维护的土地登记册是所有权的最终证明，从而降低土地纠纷的风险。 对于金融机构而言，产权不可推翻性原则对土地融资的保障至关重要，因为该原则使金融机构能够依赖土地登记册的准确性，而无需调查某一房地产的整个交易历史。 然而，一个重要的问题随之而来：金融机构在土地登记册之外，究竟需要在多大程度上履行进一步的尽职调查义务？ 这一问题在 Malayan Banking Bhd v Mohd Affandi bin Ahmad & Anor [2024] 6 MLJ 220 一案中成为核心争议。联邦

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Kingtime International Ltd v Petronas Carigali Sdn Bhd & Another Appeal addresses a question that often sits in the background of complex projects but rarely gets tested so directly. When a product has already been found to infringe, can a party further down the chain still treat that finding as someone else’s problem? This ruling shows that the answer will depend less on formal roles and more on the reality of what each party did. In worki

上诉庭在 Queensway Nominees (Asing) Sdn Bhd & Ors v ISM Sdn Bhd [2024] MLJU 2985一案中的裁决，为少数股东在面对多数股东压迫时寻求救济提供了重要指引。 本文探讨少数股东如何成功证明公司存在“准合伙关系”。 关键事实 原告 ISM Sdn Bhd（ISM） 是由拿督 Ray Cheah 及其妻子 Datin Teoh 持有的公司，两人亦为 ISM 的董事。拿督 Ray Cheah 是一名经验丰富的房地产投资者、顾问及注册产业估价师。 2006年6月，他受邀协助重启一项位于 Jalan Imbi 与 Jalan Sultan Ismail 交界处的烂尾发展项目。该地段包括两幅土地 – Lot 1282及Lot 1283（统称为 CN 土地）。CN 土地的注册拥有人已向 MPHB Capital Bhd（MPHB）的一家全资子公司取得融资。 鉴于 CN 土地规模过小，无法单独发展为具商业可行性的综合项目，拿督 Ray Cheah制定计划以拟收购相邻地块，并将整个区

From an early stage, a practical question arose: where an unsecured creditor objects to a judicial management (JM) application, does such creditor have the right to appear and oppose the application before the Court? Neither the Companies Act 2016 (CA 2016) nor the Companies (Corporate Rescue Mechanism) Rules 2018 (CRM Rules) expressly address this issue, and differing approaches had emerged at the High Court level. The position at the appellate level was subsequently consi

《国家土地法典》（National Land Code，简称“NLC”）第322条规定，凡对某土地（或该土地的份额）享有可冻结权益（caveatable interest）的人，可依据NLC所规定的Form 19B，在有关土地上提出私人冻结令登记（private caveat）。一旦登记完成，即禁止对土地所有权登记文件上，由业主本人或其代表所签署的任何处分文件或拍卖证书进行登记、批注或记载。 马来西亚法院一贯确认，只要申请人填写NLC规定的表格，说明其权利主张的性质，作出法定声明以核实其主张，并缴纳少量费用，即可迅速提交私人冻结令登记。 本文将探讨何谓“可登记权益”，以及因错误登记私人冻结令而对冻结申请人所带来的后果。 何谓“可登记权益” ？ 并非所有人均可提出私人冻结令登记。 根据NLC第323条文，任何声称拥有已分配土地（alienated land）的所有权、任何已登记权益，或对该等所有权或已登记权益享有权利的人或机构，均可提出私人冻结令登记以保障其权益。 联邦法院在 Score Options Sdn Bhd v Mexaland D

The Malaysian judiciary has recently taken a significant institutional step towards strengthening Malaysia’s position as a regional dispute resolution centre through the establishment of the International Commercial and Admiralty Division (ICAD) at the High Court of Malaya in Kuala Lumpur. Announced during the Opening of the Legal Year 2026 by the Right Honourable Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, the initiative signals a deliberate policy direction

尽管全球已逐渐走出2019 冠状病毒疾病（COVID-19）疫情，其影响仍持续波及各行各业, 尤其是建筑业承包商。鉴于建筑合同具有长期性的特点，某一阶段的延误都可能引发连锁反应，从而进一步延长整体复苏进程。 近期上诉法院在 Panzana Enterprise Sdn Bhd v Turnpike Synergy Sdn Bhd [2024] 8 AMR 881 一案中, 审视了在《2020 年减少 2019 冠状病毒疾病（COVID-19）影响临时措施法令》（Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Act 2020）（“COVID-19 法令”）下建筑承包商可获得的救济。值得一提的是，此案检验了在承包商向业主提供无条件与见索即付性质的银行保函时，COVID-19 法令的实际保障效力。 案情简介 被上诉人 Turnpike Synergy Sdn Bhd（Turnpike） 负责监督一项高速大道建设项目，而上诉人 Panz

The Energy Commission's Third Edition of the Corporate Renewable Energy Supply Scheme (CRESS) Guidelines, issued on 29 December 2025, marks a significant step in the evolution of Malaysia's corporate renewable energy market. The latest revisions move CRESS away from a documentation-heavy framework towards a more commercially workable regime, particularly in relation to project development timelines, contractual flexibility and revenue protection for renewable energy develop

Many parties assume that if a sale and purchase agreement (SPA) has not been signed, there is no binding deal because the document remains “just a draft”. A recent Court of Appeal decision suggests the position may not be so simple. In Chia Seong Pow v Alexma Corp Sdn Bhd [2026] MLJU 658, the Court of Appeal held that a binding contract for the sale of land may arise even where the SPA was never formally executed. The court’s focus was not on whether the agreement carried t

短语“时间至关重要” (Time is of the essence) 已变得极为普遍，以致其几乎成为合同中的标准条款。这类条款是缔约双方普遍预期的，因为按时履行承诺是任何协议中的基本期望。通常，这类条款会附带罚则机制以确保履约。如果一方未能遵守约定的时间表，其通常需要向另一方作出赔偿。在建筑行业中，例如，此类罚则常以约定违约金（Liquidated Ascertained Damages，简称 LAD）的形式出现。 然而，此类标准条款的加入，虽旨在最大程度保障缔约双方的权益，却可能适得其反，尤其是在一方基于善意而容忍对方延迟履行的情形下。在此情况下，容忍方可能陷入一个尴尬境地, 鉴于合同已明确约定“时间至关重要”，诉讼时效可能自最早可能的时间点开始计算。当容忍方的耐心耗尽时，可能已被诉讼时效所限制。上诉庭最近在 Yeng Chong Realty Bhd（前称Yeng Chong Realty Sdn Bhd）诉 Edward Stanislaus De Silva 及其他人 [2024] MLJU 2995即为最佳例证。 案情 原告（高庭

The Court of Appeal in P G Doraisamy a/l P Gopal v AmInvestment Bank Bhd and other appeals [2026] MLJU 919 has recently revisited the interplay between the law of discovery under Order 24 of the Rules of Court 2012 and the statutory secrecy obligations imposed under the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (SICDA 1991) and the Financial Services Act 2013 (FSA 2013), which clarifies the extent to which financial institutions and authorised depository agents may

Corporate bond issuances in Malaysia operate through a network of professional advisers responsible for structuring, disclosure and post-issuance monitoring. The integrity of this framework depends not only on the issuer, but on the accuracy and completeness of information disseminated to investors. The decision in Maybank Trustees Berhad (formerly known as Aseambankers Malaysia Bhd) v Amtrustee Bhd & Ors and other appeals [2020] 4 MLJ 405 stands as one of the most consequent