The Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) recently unveiled the Capital Market Masterplan 2026–2030 (CMP4), setting a target to grow the market size to between RM 5.8 trillion and RM 6.3 trillion by 2030. This strategic blueprint succeeds CMP3 and sets a transformative 20 year vision to reshape Malaysia’s capital market into a high-growth, sustainable and inclusive ecosystem. To be ‘future-ready’, boards must possess the agility, technical expertise and ethical judgment requi

In the recent Industrial Court Award in Nurafiera binti Mohamad Rafee v Pos Malaysia Berhad, Award No. 892 of 2026, the Industrial Court dismissed a constructive dismissal claim brought by a former employee against Pos Malaysia Berhad. The Company (Pos Malaysia Berhad) was successfully represented by Muhamad Sharulnizam bin Mohd Roni, a Senior Associate with the firm’s Employment & Industrial Relations Practice, where he submitted that the transfer of the Claimant (Nurafier

An adverse regulatory decision can have consequences extending far beyond the immediate penalty or direction imposed. For businesses operating in heavily regulated sectors, such a decision may affect licences, ongoing projects, commercial arrangements and, in some cases, the viability of the business model itself. Yet challenging the regulator is rarely a straightforward legal decision. It requires businesses to weigh legal merits against timing, cost, reputation and the lo

For much of modern corporate history, corporate governance in Malaysia was and is built around a relatively straightforward premise: directors are expected to exercise reasonable care in overseeing the affairs of the company. However, the rapid adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming how organisations operate and make decisions. AI now has the potential to significantly enhance the effectiveness of board oversight by improving directors' access to information

人工智能（AI）技术正以势不可挡之势改变着全球各法域的经济图景、社会互动及治理结构。以生成式人工智能（Generative AI）为代表的前沿系统，具备了批量产出高度逼真文本、图像、音频及视频的能力，在赋能全行业颠覆性创新的同时，也催生了一系列复杂的法律与伦理问题。围绕虚假信息传播、知识产权侵权、数据隐私保护、误导消费者以及侵权责任归属等核心议题，各国政府纷纷未雨绸缪，重新评估既有的法律框架能否有效御防人工智能所带来的衍生风险。 当前，马来西亚正处于人工智能规制的过渡阶段。与某些已颁布专门人工智能立法的法域不同，马来西亚迄今主要依赖现行行业法律与政策驱动型治理工具的结合，以规制人工智能相关活动。国家人工智能办公室（NAIO）的设立，彰显了马来西亚在释放人工智能创新红利的同时，强化国家层面统筹治理的决心。在此背景下，拟议中的《人工智能治理法案》（Artificial Intelligence Governance Bill）标志着马来西亚朝建立涵盖人工智能整个生命周期的综合法定监管框架迈出重要一步。 在不断演进的监管格局下，关于未来可能施加

As employees move between companies, use personal devices and increasingly turn to generative AI, employers face growing challenges in protecting confidential information. But while businesses can protect their trade secrets and proprietary information, they cannot expect employees to leave their skills and experience behind when they resign. The employment relationship may end, but an employee’s obligations concerning confidential information do not necessarily end with it

The most valuable asset in the technology economy may be something that cannot be patented, bought or easily replaced: knowledge. That is also what makes it so difficult to protect. As competition for artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductor talent intensifies, employees are moving between rivals with unprecedented speed and compensation. At the same time, companies are feeding increasingly sensitive information into AI systems in the pursuit of productivity. The resu

The Chairperson of a board occupies a unique position within the corporate governance framework. Unlike other directors, the chairperson is entrusted with leading the board and in many respects, the effectiveness of the board depends as much on the chairperson's ability to foster independent judgment and constructive challenge as it does on the technical expertise of individual directors.[1] At first glance, there appears to be little reason why a chairperson should be excl

Federal Court Clarifies The Limits In ISM v Queensway Nominees The Federal Court has clarified an important boundary in Malaysia’s minority oppression regime: a dispute between shareholders does not become an oppression claim merely because it arises from a shareholders’ agreement. In ISM Sendirian Bhd v Queensway Nominees (Asing) Sdn Bhd & Ors and another appeal [2026] MLJU 1467, the apex court revisited its earlier decision in Jet-Tech Materials Sdn Bhd & Anor v Yushiro

The role of the General Counsel (GC) is changing. Once regarded principally as a company’s legal gatekeeper, a GC is no longer merely responsible for contracts, disputes and regulatory compliance. The modern GC is increasingly expected to operate at the intersection of law, business strategy and enterprise risk. This shift reflects a commercial reality: the most significant risks confronting businesses rarely remain confined to neat legal categories. A contractual issue can

在2025年第1830号裁决中，工业法庭驳回了 Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perkilangan Perusahaan Makanan（工会）依据《1967年工业关系法》（Industrial Relations Act 1967, 简称 “IRA”）第56条，对 DCH Contract Manufacturing Sdn Bhd（公司）提出的不遵守申诉。 本案争议涉及公司被指未根据第4份集体协议（CA）第26条的规定，向六名工会会员支付2021年度花红。 工业法庭裁定，公司并未违反该集体协议，且其对绩效评级最低（即E级）的员工不发放花红，属依法行使其酌情权。 公司由本所资深律师 Muhamad Sharulnizam bin Mohd Roni 代理并胜诉。 该裁决就集体协议中花红条款的解释、雇主在绩效导向花红机制下酌情权的范围，以及《1967年工业关系法》第56条不遵守程序中的举证责任，提供了有益指引。 本案争议焦点 工会指称，公司违反了集体协议第26条。该条款规定如下： ...

Can a debt of RM70,000.00 be discharged by 50 units of Litecoin? This novel question was recently answered by the Court of Appeal in Ong Seow Lee v Lee Ee Foong [2026] MLJU 3331, where this ruling offers timely guidance on the intersection between digital assets and the long-established law of accord and satisfaction under the Contracts Act 1950. Background The Appellant, Ong Seow Lee, and the Respondent, Lee Ee Foong, were friends who embarked on a joint venture to mine

引言 上诉庭在 Veronica Sainik @ Ronald v Meluha Life Sciences Sdn Bhd & Ors（民事上诉号 W-02(IPCv)(W)-1713-09/2022）中的判决，标志着马来西亚知识产权法的一个重要发展，特别是在作者精神权利的范围和执行方面。该案涉及了一个具有日益增长的商业重要性的问题：当研究成果被商业化利用，甚至被纳入专利，而没有对其作者进行适当署名时，会发生什么？ 在允许该上诉时，上诉庭确认，作者根据《1987年版权法》第25条所享有的精神权利，尽管版权已被转让，仍然可予执行。更重要的是，法庭认定，在专利申请中未经授权使用和修改研究者的论文，构成了对精神权利的侵权，并且由于相同的底层事实，也导致了该专利因缺乏新颖性而无效。 简要事实 本案原告是马来亚大学的一名研究生，并参与了一个名为“从牙髓中分离、鉴定和多向分化产后干细胞”的合作项目，涉及该大学和行业合作者。作为该项目的一部分，原告进行了研究，收集了数据，并撰写了一篇包含原创性研究方法、实验数据和科研发现的硕士论文。...

Government-Linked Companies (GLCs) occupy a distinctive position within Malaysia's corporate landscape. As defined by the government, GLCs are companies that have a primary commercial objective, but where the Malaysian government has a controlling stake in major decisions, such as appointment of management positions, contract awards, strategy, restructuring and financing, acquisition and divestments.[1] Unlike privately owned corporations, GLCs are entrusted not only with gen

For creditors and investors in Malaysia’s Islamic finance market, the existence of a Shariah-compliant structure does not, by itself, answer the most important question when a transaction runs into difficulty: what can the creditor actually enforce? The answer requires a distinction between two forms of protection. The first is contractual and proprietary protection, created through security over assets or other credit-support arrangements. The second is statutory protect

引言 2025 年底，联邦法院在 Victor Saw Seng Kee (As joint liquidator of London Biscuits Bhd) (In liquidation) v Wong Weng Foo & Co & Anor and other appeals [2025] MLJU 3886 一案中，推翻了上诉庭此前在四宗相关上诉中的裁决，从而对马来西亚清盘法中的若干重要问题作出了具有系统性意义的阐释。该判决的重要性在于，联邦法院一共回答了八项法律问题，并在此过程中对清盘制度中若干长期存在但相对未被充分厘清的议题作出了进一步说明，其中尤以两项议题最具核心意义：其一为法院在何种情形下得以撤换清盘人，其二则为联合清盘人制度下清盘人权力之范围与行使方式。本文即围绕上述两项核心问题展开分析。 高庭阶段的诉讼经过 London Biscuits Berhad（“LBB”）于 2020 年 1 月 13 日被高庭作出清盘令，并委任 Lim San Peen（“LSP”）为唯一清盘人。其后，LSP 于 2021 年 5

The Court of Appeal has rejected an attempt to use Malaysian court proceedings to challenge an adverse World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) domain-name determination, holding that the Malaysian courts cannot be used as a back-door avenue to overturn an international administrative decision where there is no independent domestic cause of action. In Junzhi Wang & Anor v T C Pharmaceutical Industries Co Ltd [2026] MLJU 1306, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court

要约函（LO）通常是连接非正式协议与正式合同的桥梁，特别是在房地产、采购和合资企业领域。尽管企业可能将其视为交易的最终结果，但其法律效力并非自动产生；它取决于双方的意图和有效的接受。这无疑存在一个法律灰色地带。签署后的要约函常被误认为是具有约束力的合同，但它可能仅相当于一个初步框架，从而引发了一个问题：它究竟是产生了法律义务，还是仅仅表明了谈判的意图。 在法律上，具有约束力的合同需要要约、接受、对价以及建立法律关系的意图。只有当接受明确且毫无歧义时，要约函才满足这些要件。 这种情况很少有明确的界定。最近在Mutiara Orient Sdn Bhd v Penang Port Sdn Bhd [2026] 1 AMR 473一案中，高等法院认定合同未形成：该要约函未按其条款被接受，而且已失效并被有效撤销。该案凸显了谈判与义务之间存在一个取决于具体事实的界限。 若未被接受，要约函可能仍不具有约束力；但经适当接受后，则可转化为可强制执行的合同。 案情背景 该争议源于槟城瑞典咸码头（Swettenham Pier Cruise Term

Traditionally, corporate governance has been viewed through a relatively narrow lens: the board of directors is the custodian of governance, responsible for overseeing management, protecting shareholders' interests and ensuring that the company complied with its legal and regulatory obligations. Other stakeholders, however, were often only seen as external participants whose role was limited to engaging with the company only when their own interests were directly affected.

Malaysia is set to overhaul its competition law regime through two companion pieces of legislation: the Competition (Amendment) Bill 2026 (CA Bill) and the Competition Commission (Amendment) Bill 2026 (collectively, Bills). Together, the Bills aim to widen the reach of Malaysian competition law, strengthen the current Competition Commission (CC) investigative and enforcement powers, and rename it as the Malaysia Competition Commission (MyCC). Both Bills passed all three readi