Lecture 1
Malaysian Law
Definition of Law:
Article 160 of the Malaysian Federal Constitution defines "Law" as encompassing:
Written law
Common law
Custom or usage
The Court Structure
Hierarchy of Courts in Malaysia:
Federal Court
Court of Appeal
High Court
Sessions Court
Magistrates' Court
Common Law in Malaysia
Reception and Development:
The debate regarding Malaysia's connection to English law continues.
Malaysian legal system has benefited from ties with English law, aiding development.
The article argues against abolishing Section 3 of the Civil Law Act 1956, which allows the reception of English law in Malaysia.
Claim that it hinders the development of Malaysian common law is considered unfounded.
Calls for amendments to Section 3 to improve and streamline English law reception and enhance Malaysian common law development.
Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 67)
Key Provisions of Section 3:
General Application of English Law:
Peninsular Malaysia:
Common law of England and the rules of equity as administered on 7 April 1956.
Sabah:
Common law and equity as of 1 December 1951.
Sarawak:
Common law and equity as of 12 December 1949.
Application is subject to local circumstances and necessary qualifications.
Legislation and Interpretation
Need for Interpretation:
Challenges in discerning Parliamentary intent.
Tools of Interpretation
Types of Aids:
Intrinsic Aids:
Although not specified, these assist in interpreting the statute itself.
Extrinsic Aids:
External references that help clarify statutory meaning.
Judicial Principles:
Principles established by courts that guide interpretation.
Example: The Mischief Rule
Function of the Judge:
To construct laws that suppress mischief and promote remedies.
Case Reference:
Smith v Hughes ([1960] 2 All E.R. 859):
Context: Statute prohibiting solicitation in the street.
Situation: Defendants soliciting from balconies; claimed not guilty since they were not "in the street."
Conclusion: Judge applied the mischief rule, holding them guilty as intended by the statute to address public harassment.
Additional Case for Study
PJD Regency Sdn Bhd V. Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah:
Court: Federal Court, Putrajaya on 19 January 2021.
Key Issues:
Land law and the implications of timely delivery of vacant possession.
Examination of Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD) claims.
Interpretation of Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 and its relevance to statutory interpretation and social legislation.