大多数建筑工程涉及长期法律争议，有时持续多年，且常包括各方提出无数诉讼、审裁、仲裁、上诉等。在此过程中，必然会有胜诉方和“落败方”。然而，当这些“落败方”因未清偿判决债务而面临被清盘的情况时，会发生什么呢 ？ 近期，在 Lucksoon Metal Works Sdn Bhd v Propel Synergy Sdn Bhd  [2025] MLJU 110 案中，高等法院在一场涉及Lucksoon Metal Works Sdn Bhd（“原告“）的诉讼期间，驳回了一项 Fortuna 禁制令（即法院禁止债权人提交并提呈清盘申请的命令）的申请。   背景 该争议的核心围绕于位于马六甲的一项酒店开发工程（“项目”）。原告为分包商，负责包括铝覆层及幕墙系统的设计和安装等工作。被告 Propel Synergy Sdn Bhd 为原告的雇主。随后，原告、被告及与项目相关的其他各方之间产生争议。在提出 Fortuna 禁制令的申请时，原告的处境如下： a)   高等法院作出了有利于原告与被告的判决（其中原告需向被告支付约超过 RM1,000,000）（

Introduction   The Court of Appeal’s decision in Veronica Sainik @ Ronald v Meluha Life Sciences Sdn Bhd & Ors (Civil Appeal No. W-02(IPCv)(W)-1713-09/2022) marks an important development in Malaysian intellectual property law, particularly in relation to the scope and enforcement of an author’s moral rights. The case addresses a question of increasing commercial significance: what happens when research output is commercially exploited, or even incorporated into a patent, wi

A Letter of Offer (LO) often bridges informal agreement and formal contract, particularly in property, procurement and joint ventures. While businesses may treat it as a deal’s conclusion, its legal force is not automatic; it depends on intention and valid acceptance. This certainly masks a grey area. A signed LO is frequently mistaken for a binding contract, yet it may amount only to a preliminary framework, raising the question of whether it creates obligations or merely si

“……首先，该问题涉及对财产的剥夺。《联邦宪法》第13(1)条保障任何人不得在非依法情况下被剥夺其财产。在理解与适用该项保障时，应当倾向于维护而非否定该保障。除非且直至有明确的明文条文限制在任何剥夺财产的程序中之参与权，否则任何相关法律均应被解释为允许，甚至鼓励该等参与。否则，就财产被剥夺所支付之赔偿是否充分，可能会受到影响。” —— 联邦法院于  Spicon Products Sdn Bhd v Tenaga Nasional Bhd & Anor [2022] 4 CLJ 195   马来西亚《联邦宪法》赋予其公民若干基本权利。其中，财产权受《联邦宪法》第13条之特别保障。财产权本质上包括在不受干预之情况下使用及享有其财产之权利。然而，第13条所提供之保障并非绝对，因为该条文本身亦规定可对该权利作出限制：   “ (1) 任何人不得在非依法情况下被剥夺其财产。 (2) 任何法律不得在未给予充分赔偿之情况下规定对财产之强制征用或使用。”   《1960年土地征用法令》即为其中一项规范土地征用之法律，其目的在于规范土地征用之程序、挑战征用程序

The Online Safety Act 2025 (ONSA) came into force on 1 January 2026. Malaysia has now joined a growing group of jurisdictions that do not leave online safety to platform discretion alone. With the coming into force of ONSA, Parliament has introduced a statutory framework aimed squarely at how licensed online service providers manage harmful content, respond to complaints, and design safety into their systems. Over the past decade, digital platforms have become central to comm

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Yeoh Tseow Suan v Musa Hassan  [2026] 3 CLJ 593 marks an important development in Malaysian defamation law, particularly in its treatment of public officials, political discourse, and the limits of permissible speech. The case is significant not merely for its outcome, but for its careful doctrinal clarification across several contested areas, most notably the scope of the Derbyshire principle, the threshold requirements of defamation, and th

于2025年2月15日，本律所高级合伙人拿督 DP Naban 于马来亚银行（Maybank）主办之第十届《2025年交易与治理大会》（10th Dealing & Governance Conference 2025）上，参与题为“家族办公室：跨世代财富转移之重大趋势”的专题论坛。与其同台参与讨论者包括： — Bernard Yap（安永 Ernst & Young 税务合伙人）； — Ramesh Manimekalanandan（马来亚银行集团财富管理部产品与投资主管）。 该专题论坛汇集税务及财富管理领域之专业见解，重点探讨高净值家族在马来西亚设立单一家族办公室（Single Family Office, “ SFO ”）时所需考量的最新发展与策略重点。讨论核心涵盖森林城市特别金融区（Forest City Special Financial Zone, “ FCSFZ ”）项目下新近推出之税务激励措施、SFO 的最优架构安排，以及相应之投资控股实体，单一家族办公室载体（Single Family Office Vehicle, “ SFO

A recent ruling by the Federal Court in Lee Kean Choon v Khoo San & Ors  [Civil Appeal N0: 01(f)-11-04-2025(B)], confronts a seemingly technical question under the National Land Code (NLC): when is a decision “communicated” for the purpose of triggering the statutory deadline for appeal?   The answer carries considerable weight. Section 418 of the NLC imposes a strict three-month window to challenge decisions made by land authorities. Miss that deadline, and the right to appe

高等法院在 Asia Media Sdn Bhd（清盘）（清盘后申请编号 WA-28PW-356-06/2024） 一案中的最新裁决，提供了一个及时的提醒：当公司进入清盘程序时，真正掌握主动权的是谁。该裁决阐明了在《2016年公司法》第477条下，在委任私人清盘人时，应如何衡量债权人意愿。长期以来，该条文在司法酌情权的运用上存在一定的模糊空间，也因此引发不少争议，而本案正好对此提供了更清晰的指引。   在 Asia Media  一案中，争议表面上并不特别：公司已被裁定清盘后，出现两组相互竞争的私人清盘人提名。多数股东 MMM Group Berhad 提名 Andrew Heng 与 Ashvin Mahendran担任清盘人。   少数债权人 Peakmax Sdn Bhd 则提出其自身提名人 Tee Siew Kai。然而，投票结果具有决定性。MMM 持有超过95%的已承认债务，并在债权人会议上获得99.72%的支持；Peakmax 仅占0.28%。   一项熟悉的法律原则，再次被强调   第477条赋予法院在清盘后任命中的广泛酌情权。马来

In Award No. 1830 of 2025, the Industrial Court dismissed a non-compliance complaint brought by Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan (the Union) against DCH Contract Manufacturing Sdn Bhd (the Company) under Section 56 of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA).   The dispute concerned the Company’s alleged failure to pay a bonus for the year 2021 to six union members pursuant to Article 26 of the 4th Collective Agreement (CA).   The Industrial Court held t

The relationship between medical evidence and employment decisions is becoming an increasingly delicate one. A recent High Court decision illustrates how easily employers can misstep when illness, workplace expectations and legal obligations collide.   In Sunshine Bread Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Auric Flavours Sdn Bhd) v Tan Seng Kok [2025] MLJU 4354, the High Court affirmed that an employee dismissed while recovering from severe illness had been terminated without just caus

Malaysia’s decision to permit cross-border exports of renewable electricity is emerging as a significant opportunity for regional energy investors. Following the publication of the third edition of the Guide for Cross-Border Electricity Sales (CBES Guide), developers are increasingly evaluating privately sponsored, project-financed renewable projects designed to supply Singapore’s electricity market.   This alert outlines the principal legal and regulatory considerations rele

When a party repudiates a contract, the innocent party faces an election: to affirm the contract and insist on performance, or to accept the repudiation and treat the contract as discharged. Repudiation alone does not terminate the contract; termination occurs only when the aggrieved party accepts the repudiation.   A longstanding question has been whether acceptance must be expressed, or whether it may arise through conduct, particularly through a failure to perform further

In November 2025, the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) issued Public Consultation Paper No. 4/2025 – Market Segmentation Review (the Consultation Paper), proposing targeted refinements to the listing frameworks applicable to the Main Market and ACE Market of Bursa Malaysia. The proposals form part of the SC’s broader initiative to strengthen market segmentation, enhance investor protection and ensure that Malaysia’s capital markets remain competitive and aligned with evolv

Beneath the glamorous and fast-paced veneer of the corporate world lies a creeping anxiety among directors: that a single lapse in judgment or a wrong commercial decision could lead to their professional crucifixion.   This alert seeks to quell such unease by unpacking a foundational doctrine in Malaysian corporate law, namely the business judgment rule and by setting out the confines within which directors may safely exercise their discretion without attracting liability.  

马来西亚上诉法院就分层建筑短期租赁争议作出重要裁决，并阐明管理公司权限边界及私人契约效力，为长期悬而未决的法律问题提供了明确指引。Wawasan Raya Sdn Bhd v MARC Service Residence Management Corporation [2025] 4 MLRA 1 一案的判决，堪称近年来该领域最具指导意义的司法意见之一。随着爱彼迎（Airbnb）等平台带动短期租赁市场迅速扩张，法律规范却未能同步跟进，致使实务界长期处于规则模糊地带。此项裁决恰逢其时，为业主、更为清晰的法律框架与行动指引。   过去十年，短期租赁已成为都市房产经济的重要组成部分。对业主而言，它意味着可观的租金收益；对住户而言，却往往常伴随安全隐患、人员流动频繁及噪音扰民等现实困扰。为应对这一趋势，许多发展商在项目落成初期，便通过相互契约（Deed of Mutual Covenant）预先设定限制条款，试图在管理机构成立之前， 对单位的使用方式加以规范。。然而，此类私人契约能否凌驾于《马来西亚分层管理法令2013》所构建的法定制度之上，长期以来始终

The Court of Appeal has drawn a firm jurisdictional line between the Labour Office and the Industrial Court, ruling that once an unfair dismissal claim is before the Industrial Court, the Labour Office is effectively stripped of authority to adjudicate related wage disputes.   In Philip Phang Kin Ming & Anor v M Jets International Sdn Bhd (Civil Appeal No: B-04(A)-422-09/2024), the court unanimously held that Section 69A of the Employment Act 1955 (EA) operates as a statutor

The Federal Court delivered a significant clarification of the doctrine of total failure of consideration, restoring analytical discipline to an area of law that had drifted into uncertainty. In Lim Swee Choo & Anor v Ong Koh Hou & Another Appeal  [2025] 10 CLJ, the court disentangled restitutionary principle from contractual termination and, in doing so, has reset the architecture of Malaysian unjust enrichment jurisprudence.   At issue was a deceptively technical question:

Compulsory land acquisition often sits at the crossroads of constitutional protection and statutory rigidity. While Article 13 of the Federal Constitution guarantees a fair and adequate compensation in the realm of land acquisition, that constitutional promise may collide with the procedural trapdoors embedded within the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (LAA 1960).   For a dissatisfied landowner, the path to contesting the Land Administrator's award is not a simple plea for equity b

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) considerations have moved from the margins to the centre of supply chain management, evolving from a voluntary or reputational exercise into a material legal, commercial and transactional risk. Companies are increasingly expected to take responsibility not only for their own operations, but also for the ESG performance of their suppliers, contractors and business partners across the value chain.   For Malaysian manufacturers integrat