“The Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA) has been legislated to facilitate cash flow in the construction industry.” – a sentiment readily resonated nationally amongst judges and legal practitioners in the construction industry alike, amongst others.
It is a standard practice in the hotel industry to collect a 10% service charge from the customers in place of a tipping system, which will in turn be distributed to the eligible employees. This seemingly explains why the hotel industry employees were paid low basic salary, because they would be compensated with the income earned from service charge.
Section 17A of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 has been set in motion today by seeing the first charge made against an offshore vessel company, since the provision came into force on 1 June 2020.
When a contractor takes over the sub-contractor’s works, can the contractor make a claim in adjudication against the sub-contractor? Scenarios as such are not uncommon as contractors may be obliged take over the sub-contractor’s works when the sub-contractor can no longer proceed with its work, refuses to carry out rectification works, or worst, abandons the project altogether.
Contractors who find themselves in such circumstances and wish to make a claim against the sub-contractors by way of an adjudication under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (“CIPAA”) should be wary of the recent High Court case, Hiform (M) Sdn Bhd v Pembinaan Bukit Timah Sdn Bhd and another case.
Liability of Online Marketplaces for IP Infringement by Their Sellers As e-commerce is booming, it will not be an overstatement to say that online marketplaces have disrupted the retail scene. For example, Amazon gets close to a global 6 billion views a month while in...
On 19 January 2021, the Federal Court delivered a landmark decision in PJD Regency Sdn Bhd v Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah & Anor (“PJD Decision”).(1) The apex court decided that in the event of a delay in the delivery of vacant possession (“VP”) for Schedule G...
Following a statement released by the Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) on 26 January 2021, which reminded unlisted public companies to comply with the requirements in the SC’s prospectus guidelines and securities laws, we believe that the following information will...
Technology Reduces the Need for Transfers, Encourages Remote Trials In Muhammad Hafidz bin Mohd Dusuki v Hassan bin Zulkifli[1], the defendant in a copyright infringement claim applied to transfer the case from Kuala Lumpur to Kota Bharu on the following grounds: The...
The Securities Commission Malaysia (SC) has recently issued a Guidance Note on the Provision of Investment Advice[1]. Given the increasing number of self-proclaimed investment advisors, the Guidance Note clarifies situations in which a person must be licensed by the...
Housing Developers Beware – Federal Court Upholds Faber Union