Friday, October 8, 2010

Perhaps Love....

Yesterday, i took the initiative to start talking with Z again. Asking some silly questions on job. How do you do? How's life? getting any job offer again? So silly and made me feels like laughing when think back about it. Well, i know its lame but i really hope that we still can be friend, despite what ever things that he did to me. Peaceful morning makes me think better, because i am more rational and think logically. Sometimes our heart just don't think the same. Haha! 

Back to the main point, I think i have let go of him? totally? I am 70% certain that i have no longer sad nor heart pain on what he do. But not so sure bout the remaining 30% on when i will start go crazy again. Hopefully I wont do that forever!!

I thought of something silly again. "What if he bring his gf in front of me and they are very intimate to each other?" Seriously i don't have any idea on what I will do but i think i am OK gua.....

Anyway, both parties has their fault and the cause that makes us break up is not all just about him. I also have the responsibilities. Maybe i am not generous enough and don't know how to handle the situation well when my bf start going out more frequent with his friends than me. Or maybe we are just not love each other deep enough that can make us sacrifice for each other. I don't but I am willing to.. But i know 100% he wont do so to me..hahaha!! Who am i? Someone who don't know how to dress up and in terms of pretty and young. I lose all to his new gf, Jo. She is really pretty and cute lo...Have to admit it. If i am a guy, I would also do the same. That the reality side of the world. Just hope that Z will grown up abit, don't be so childish again, think bout his future and don't hurt girls anymore. I do believe in Karma...hahaha!!(sounds like cursing..shall stop it)

I learnt the same thing in corporate world as well. If you are not good enough, no one would see you as a person. But if you excel in something, suddenly you felt you are surrounded by loves and cares. ( kononnya..)

So be aware of everything and everyone who treat you good. Maybe they don't mean it seriously. I get a very good experience from my ex boss, who will just kick you off and used you as a tool to sabotage other. Besides that, I have also learnt it from my ex, where guys really can say I LOVE YOU to you and they don't mean it at all. Ish ish...

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

When Abnormalities Come

It's a nice morning and I still wake up early today, helping my mum doing some house core. The feeling is weird because my feeling isn't sad anymore instead, i felt guilty. I am guilty for making my parents worry about me, guilty for being sad for someone who no longer loves me and guilty for making the people surrounding me worry.

Yesterday, i had a good chat with J, happily waking him up and greet him. And i can feel that he is happy too. J requested whether can i treat him that well until the day we are old, no longer have teeth and use tongkat to walk. At that moment, i am really doubting myself. Am i really cured? Am i love him? Can I totally forget bout Z and letting go everything? To be frank, i don't believe in an ever after relationship anymore.

Too many things happened and i had been hurt for N-less times. and now, i can no longer sustain any hurt or damages because i can't feel my own self anymore. No worries, I won't go and commit suicide right now although i do think of it before. The feeling is like when your heart has been stabbed for so many times and you felt the pain everything its strike, then eventually, you stopped your breathing and die. No more blood and pain. Because it already over the limit. I wonder what we will feel when we are die. And now i felt it, I am justt like a walking corpse now.A body without a soul. No longer feel affectionate, love, care, sad, or excited. Just a peaceful monotone emotion.

I feel myself changing as well. Started to get serious and smile lesser. And one more big change is that i started to love going to temple and pray. The serene yet beautiful environment, the clear and peaceful sound of bell, the natural voice of chirping birds gave me a very comfortable feeling. Maybe, i started to have the potential to become a nun. Hahaha!! Kidding man..I can't never be that holy..

Anyway, I am going to stop my post here, I am happy with my own self again..^^

*Thank you mummy and daddy for your love. Thank you my siblings for their cuteness and silliness. Thank you my friends especially SP, HC,SN,WM, R, SH for being supportive. Thank you Y and P for your love. I believe that you two do really love me a lot. Sorry for the disappointment.
And lastly, thank you J for being by my side when i was down and hurt, thank you for your encouragement and support.

*BIG HUGS TO EVERYONE*

Monday, October 4, 2010

It's Okay

This song is specially dedicated to to Z, saying all my inner feeling to him...Sorry for everything that i have done, everything that makes you made such a decision, to leave me for a better you. Sorry and thank you...

Dilemma

What the hell i am thinking? I am still getting awake in shock, on a nice early morning. I had been thinking a lot since the past few months,thinking what things I could do in order to maintain and save back my relationship with him. I don't know what will be the consequences if i really do that. Perhaps i would get hurt once again when he don't have feeling with me again, or i will be ended up in a miserable life, waiting and hoping for him to come back every night. But still, I have the urge to try it again. Aiks...stupid me.. I should be glad now, ending a worst relationship as mentioned by all my friends and family. 

However, there is one soh lou, J keeps teaching me and encourage me to go after what i want and keep supporting me to go after him. He thought that i would be happy if I back together with him. How silly he was. The moment he said that words, I can felt that he is not happy at all,although he keep on smiling with me, pretending that he is happy. Well, what he said is right. I just can't let go and hoping that someday, something would turns better and i will be happy back like last time. But i just can't figure out why a guy would ask the girl to go after her ex even though he likes her. He accompany her when she is sad, lend the shoulder for the girl when she cried and do so many stupid things to cheer her up, although he knows that deep down in the girl's heart, she is still loving her ex. Stupid J even used my handphone to sms my ex, asking my ex whether he still likes me anot and is there any possibilities that we getting back. OMG!!! So stupid and my reputation get tarnished. I know he was just trying to help me.
After so many things happened, I get myself a conclusion for the power of love. Loves can really blinded up people and makes people do something that they won't do it usually. Girl still love her ex even though her ex lied to her, cheated her and started a new relationship with another girl. and the guy who knows that the girl might be leaving him someday, but still, he still go after the girl, doing all those silly things just to make the girl happy. What is happening? I really hope that everyone would appreciate what they have now and couples will be happily ever after. And specially dedicated to J;

Thank you so much for your love, J. *Hugs*



The week 12


Today is already the week 12 I have been separated with him, and again, I still missing him, thinking back the old memories that we had and the moment we have been together. I still remember the moment how well and how happy we have been together, despite all the bad things happening to us. On 1st of oct, it is our 4th year anniversary. Last time, even there isn’t much celebration, and yet, we are still happy together, outing and caring for each other. But its different all now, he already mentioned that he doesn’t loves me anymore and I can feel it even before we break up. Just I keep on denying it and hoping for the day he would come back to my side.
My heart sank when he said that he doesn't love me anymore and just saying I love you because he want to comfort me, doesn't want to see me sad. The words uttered is just like a thousand spears spearing into my heart. Another news I got is that he is already coupled with a girl, but according to him, he is just merely playing. Well, i know that he lied to me again. I don't know which words of him is true and which words of him is right. But i think that doesn't makes any differences anymore. The thing i am sure of is that he already forget about me. There is no longer love nor affectionate from him. I shall start to forget him slowly.....slowly....



Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Contract of Indemnity

 A contract by which one party promises to save the other from loss caused to him by the conduct of the promisor himself, or by the conduct of any other person, is called a 'contract of indemnity'.(Wiki Answer,2010).  All contracts of insurance (other than marine, life and accident insurance are contract of indemnity. This means that in case of a loss against which the policy has been made, the insured is entitle to be indemnified, for example, to be compensated for his loss but he cannot recover more than the actual loss

The example for indemnity contract are;

 Ali owned a factory in Bintulu and he bought an insurance to assured his factory from fire accident. One day, factory store room is burned and he asked for compensation for his loss. Under indemnity contract, insurance company will pay compensation for his loss as stated in the contract.

Terms of Contract


When parties entered into an agreement, the terms of contract are very important as it contained information and details regarding the contract. Thus, it is important for us to know what are terms of contract and the rules and regulations that must included in term of contract. Below are few FAQs regarding term of contract.



What is ‘term of contract’?

 Term of contract is a stipulation in a contract of sale with reference to goods which are the subject thereof may be a condition or a warranty [Section 12(1)]



What is ‘warranty’? What rights may arise if warranty is breached?

Warranty is a stipulation collateral to main purpose of the contract. The rights to claim for damages but not a right to reject the goods and treat of contract may arise if the warranty is breached. [Section 12 (3)] 


What is ‘condition’? What rights may arise if condition is breached?

A condition is a stipulation essential to the main purpose of the contract. The rights to treat the contract may arise of the condition is breached [Section 12(2)]



Who determine whether a term of contract is warranty or condition?

The Court is the one who determine whether a term of contract is a warranty or condition.



What is meant by ‘time is of essence in the contract’?

 Time is essence in the contract mean that the timing or time for payment is the key or an essential element of the contract. For example, if the time pf payment shall be the essence of the contract, if the buyer fails to pay by an agreed date, it does entitle the seller to repudiate the contract.


nemo dat quod non habet


Nemo dat quod non habet means that no one [can] give what he does not have" as stated in Section 27 of the Sale of Goods Act 1957.  In other meaning,  the purchase of a possession from someone who has no ownership right to it denies the purchaser any ownership title. The rationale behind this rules is to protect the rights of ownership. Related cases showing the nemo dat quod non habet rule are illustrated in Lim Chui Lai v. Zeno Ltd (1964) and Ng Nyat Siang v. Arab Malaysian Finance Bhd & Anor (1988)


•
•

However, there are some exceptions to the nemo dat quod habet rule included; 

1) estoppel
2) sale by merchantile agent
3) sale by one of joint owners
4) sale under voidable title
5) sale by a seller in possession after sale
6) sale by a buyer in possession

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Caveat Emptor and Caveat Venditor



Caveat Emptor is a Latin word it means "let the buyer beware". It is a warning that tells buyer that the goods he or she is buying are "as it", or subject to all defects. The seller is not going to carry full responsibilities for any defect in the goods. It is stated under the doctrine of caveat emptor. With Caveat Emptor, seller is not liable to disclose all the information of the product. Thus, the buyer must examine, judge, and test the product by himself or herself before making the decision to purchase the product. The most common practice of caveat emptor is used in many online businesses such as E-bay and some of the e-commerce business. Mostly, the seller will state “CAVEAT EMPTOR" in the description of the goods or in any information that may related to the sale of goods. Thus, buyer should really be careful when buying goods especially during online shopping. 



Sound horrible??? That is the fact and reality when we are engaging in sale of good. However, there are quite a number of implied conditions and warranties to protect the buyer. The implied terms are;

  • Implied Condition as to Title
  • Implied Warranty to Quiet Possession of the Goods
  • Implied Warranty against Encumbrance of Charge
  • Implied Condition on Sale by Description
  • Implied condition of Fitness for Purpose
  • Implied Condition of Merchantable Quality
  • Implied Condition on the Sale by Sample

Well, when dealing in sale of goods, buyer is not only the only victim in faulty transaction. Sometimes, the seller is victimized from faulty transaction. Some indecent buyer may trick seller into engaging faulty trading to gain benefit from the seller. Thus, the seller should also have awareness and carry responsibilities when engaging in sale of goods.  Caveat Venditor means "let the seller beware". It’s stated that despite the responsibilities imposed on buyers, sellers also have to bear the responbilities on goods to prevent themselves from being deceived. The case of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916) is regarded as the origin of caveat venditor.  In this case, Buick Motor is liable for MacPherson's injury due to the collapse of a defective wheel. 



Moral of the story: Be careful when engaging in sale of goods. Inspect and see carefully the agreement especially those 'too good to be true' agreements 


Friday, April 9, 2010

Implied Term Under SOGA

 A contract of sales of goods is an essential contract in our daily life and most of us do enter into a contract of sales of goods.  For instance, you want to buy a laptop with a list of specifications that you want at a reasonable price. Thus, you go to a well known computer shop and negotiate with the seller. The negotiation ended when the seller agreed to sell you the laptop you wished at a price. Thus, he printed out the receipt and gave it to you and you signed the receipt (or an agreement) and pay the price of laptop to the seller. In this case, you are actually entering into a contract of sales of goods.


No one wish that something bad to happen to the goods we bought and thus, we need to understand the rules and regulations set by law of Malaysia regarding the sales of goods in order to protect our rights. 


One of the law governing the sales of goods is The Sale of Goods Act 1957. It implies a number of stipulations in every contract for the sale of goods. These implied terms  stated in Section 14 to Section 17 are;





Terms
Section
Explanation
Implied condition as to title
Section 14(a)
Seller must has a rights to sell the goods at the time the property is to pass to the buyer
Implied warranty that buyer shall have quiet possession of the goods
Section 14(b)
Seller should have and enjoy the full possession to the goods he bought from the seller.
Implied warranty that the goods are unencumbered
Section 14(c)
The goods should be free from any charge in favor of any third party not declared to the buyer before or at the time the contract is made
Implied condition that in a sale of goods by description, the goods must correspond with the description
Section 15
The goods must be correspond with the description stated in the contract
Goods Must be Reasonably Fit for the Purposes for which the Buyer wants them
Section 16
Buyer must exercise case when he makes purchases. Else, the buyer must be the consequences
Sale by sample
Section 17
Contract for sale by sample must have such implied condition:
1)      bulk shall correspond with the sample in quality
2)      buyer shall have reasonable opportunity of comparing the bluk with the sample
3)      goods shall free from any defect. If bulk is partly defect, buyer may elect to accept and claim for damages



Notes: These implied terms may apply ONLY when the parties to the contract of sale have not EXCLUDED or MODIFIED them.




Reference: General Principles of Malaysian Law by Lee Mei Pheng



Thursday, April 8, 2010

Nature, Definition, and Scope of SOGA


Another chapter has began and the topic I am going to write today is regarding the tutorial question discussed during class. SOGA or also stand for Scope of Sale of Goods Act 1957 is a law to govern the rights of the buyer and seller. It is an essential law regarding the sale of goods. Here is some FAQs regarding the nature, definition and scope of SOGA.



What is ‘sale of goods’ contract?

Sale of goods contract is a contract whereby the seller transfers or agree to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a price [Section 4 (1), Sale of Goods Act 1957]. It is said that sale occurs when the seller passes the ownership to the buyer.



Discuss the elements necessary to exist in a sale of goods contract.

The elements necessary to exist in sale of goods contract are parties to the contract, price and also offer and acceptance. In a contract of sale of goods, the parties involved are the seller and buyer. Their capacity is governed under the Contracts Act 1950 where;


The contract is made by an offer to buy or sell goods at a price + acceptance of such an offer (s.5(1)). 
The offer & acceptance may be made in writing or/and by word of mouth, or implied from conduct (s.5(2))



The most essential elements that must included in a contract of sale of goods is the price. Price involved the money consideration in a sale of goods. 




What is ‘goods’ under the SOGA?

By definition from Section 2,SOGA, goods is defined as 'every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money; and includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land which are agrees to be severed before sale or under the contract of sale'. Land is excluded from the SOGA.


Goods can be in the form of future goods or existing goods [Section 6,SOGA].  Besides that, there are specific goods and unascertained goods. Future goods are goods that to be produced by seller ONLY after making the contract of sale [Section 2, SOGA]. For example, a construction company may only start building the house in housing area after they make the contract of sale to the buyer. The property (house) is then classified as future goods.


Mean while, existing goods are the goods that already possessed by seller or owned by the seller. Specific goods are goods that are identified and agreed upon the contract of sale of goods is made. For example, when we go to a second hand car dealer and we bought the second hand car after we inspect it. The property ( second hand car) is said to be a specific goods. Unascertained goods are the goods that identified by description of the goods only. For example, I browsed through an online boutique and saw a pretty cloth that sell for RM 23. I bought the cloth through the online boutique just by seeing the description of the cloth. The cloth is an unascertained goods.



Price in an important feature in a sale of goods contract. How is price being fixed? 


There are few manners in which the price may be fixed;

  • Fixed by contract
  • Left in a manner to be agreed, eg by 3rd party
  • Determined by course of dealing of the parties
  • By subject to a reasonable price, s.9.









Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Mind Mapping (Company Law)




A brief notes regarding Company Law.

Sunday, April 4, 2010

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Introduction to Company Law (Part 2)

In Part 2, I am going to discuss issues regarding post commencement of a company and also the legal issue regarding company management. Here are some of the common questions;

1) How is the structure of management in a company, sole proprietorship and also partnership?

For a company, members are neither its managers or directors nor its agents. For sole proprietorship, owner owns and manages the firm himself and can employ employees to run and manage the firm for him. Meanwhile, members in partnership are agents of the firm. They are responsible to carry out the business in ordinary course of business and generally entitled to manage the firm.

2) How is the capital and liability are managed for a company, sole proprietorship and partnership?

For a company, capital subscribed by the member s for their shares cannot ordinarily be returned to them, but(in a limited company) they are not liable for its debts once they hold fully paid shares. In contrast, sole proprietor may withdraw capital and his liability for the firm's debt is unlimited. Same with sole proprietorship, partners in a partnership may withdraw capital but their liability for firm's debt is unlimited as well.


3) Can a company,sole proprietorship and partnership borrow fund? What is their borrowing powers?

Companies can borrow for the purposes covered by their objects as contained in their Memorandum of Association. Meanwhile, partners in partnership have unrestricted powers of borrowing in terms of amount and purpose. A sole proprietor has unrestricted powers of borrowing.

4) Can company, sole proprietorship and partnership use its assets as security??

Companies can use its current assets as security by creating floating charges. Defined by Wikipedia, A floating charge is a security interest over a fund of changing assets of a company or a limited liability partnership (LLP). A partnership and sole proprietorship cannot create floating charges but can mortgage the firm's assets.

5) How a company, partnership and sole proprietorship dissolve themselves?

A company can be dissolved using formal procedure such as winding up and liquidation. Partnerships may be dissolved informally, for example, by agreement of the partners. Sole proprietorships may be dissolved informally by the sole proprietor himself.


Monday, March 22, 2010

Introduction to Company Law (Part 1)

This post is to give an insight to readers regarding the company law in Malaysia. Part 1 of the Company Law will introduce the definition of company law and major difference between a company, partnership and sole partnership in terms of formation of the firms.

1) What is Company Law?

Company Law is the law relating to companies in Malaysia contained in the Companies Act 1965 (Revised 1973). There are few key areas of company law based on judicial precedents although company law in Malaysia is based mainly on said act.

2) What is the major difference in structure of a company, partnership and sole partnership?

By definition, sole proprietorship is formed by an individual in business on his own while partnership is formed by two or more persons carrying on business with a view of profit. On the other hand, a company is a person separate from its members.

3) How a company, partnership and sole partnership is registered in Malaysia?

A company need to be registered with Registrar of Companies as a company under Companies Act 1965. Mean while, partnership and sole partnership need to register their business under the Registration of Businesses Act 1956.

4) How is the constitution of company, partnership and sole proprietorship is formed?

A company must be constituted in writing for example, the Memorandum and Articles of Association. A partnership may be formed orally or by writing. For sole proprietorship, there is no agreement needed since sole proprietor is only one person by himself.



Stay TUNED~~

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Justice Anywhere??

I saw a movie today titled " Law Abiding Citizen" and here is the trailer from youtube website i get;





The story is about a a guy named Clyde Shelton who is an upstanding family man. His wife and daughter are brutally murdered during a home invasion. When the killers are caught, Nick Rice, a hotshot young Philadelphia prosecutor, is assigned to the case. Over his objections, Nick is forced by his boss to offer one of the suspects a light sentence in exchange for testifying against his accomplice. Fast forward ten years. The man who got away with murder is found dead and Clyde Shelton coolly admits his guilt. Then he issues a warning to Nick: Either fix the flawed justice system that failed his family, or key players in the trial will die. Soon Shelton follows through on his threats, orchestrating from his jail cell a string of spectacularly diabolical assassinations that can be neither predicted nor prevented. Philadelphia is gripped with fear as Sheltons high-profile targets are slain one after another and the authorities are powerless to halt his reign of terror. Only Nick can stop the killing, and to do so he must outwit this brilliant sociopath in a harrowing contest of wills in which even the smallest misstep means death. With his own family now in Sheltons crosshairs, Nick finds himself in a desperate race against time facing a deadly adversary who seems always to be one step ahead.



The movie shows that justice system do have flaws and the prosecutor are not deserved what he get. This changed the life of a normal man drastically. In order to revenge against the suspect, the main actor has been into a no return road. Do our own justice system are flawless that every "bad guy" are actually prosecuted to what they actually deserved?? This is a big thought for all of us. 

Notes: I am just stating my opinion regarding the MOVIE and not on the justice system of any country! PLEASE take note!




Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Contract law and application

Chong and Wei went shopping and decided to shop at Super Supermarket. Wei looked at the goods which were on display and decided to purchase 3 bottles of face cream which were on offer. She took the bottles to the counter where she paid for them. As they were leaving that supermarket, the cashier came up to them and told them that they have to return the goods.


What are the issues? Discuss the law and cases used as reference in this case. Advise Wei according to Contract Act 1950 and relevant decided case(s).



 The issue on this case is whether Wei should return the goods to the cashier or not.

Let do some analysis on the case. Firstly, Super Supermarket displayed the face cream in it shop and displaying of goods is actually an invitation to treat. Some cases could be use as reference to support this statement, such as Fisher vs Bell case where the defendant displayed flick knives in his shop windows. He was then convicted of a criminal offence of offering such knives for sale. The conclusion of the case is display of any goods with a price tag on it in a shop window was not an offer but rather it was an invitation to treat.


Next, Wei showed his interest by taking the bottles to the counter and Wei offered to buy the goods [Section 2(a) of the Contracts Act]. Then, sale has take place where Wei paid for the items. Thus, the proposal of Wei to buy the goods is said to be accepted since the cashier had took the money from Wei    [Section 2 (b) of the Contract Act].


Followed the law and cases referred to, the contract is said to be legally binding and Wei can resist and not to return the goods to cashier.

Reference: General Principles of Malaysian Law by Lee Mei Pheng

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Pros and Cons of Doctrine of Stare Decisis

Followed the definition by Wikipedia, Stare Decisis is the legal principle by which judges are obliged to obey the set-up precedents established by prior decisions. This means that the judges are bound to follow the decision made by other judges before them in dealing with cases with similar facts.

There are discussion on the pros and cons of such system. Advantages of such system are time saving and convenient. If a problem has already answer and been solved it is natural to reach the same conclusion. Besides that, the existence of stare decisis may prevent a judge from making a mistake that he might have made if he had been left on his own without any guidance. Injustice can be also prevented because the decision made is same with similar cases. The interests of justice also demand impartiality from the judge. This may be assured by the existence of a binding precedent, which he must follow unless it is distinguishable. If he tries to distinguish an indistinguishable case his attempt will be obvious. This can ensures impartiality of judge. The most important advantage of Doctrine of Stare Decisis is it provides greater certainty in the law. It allows persons to order their affairs and come to settlements with a certain amount of confidence.



The disadvantages of such system are it limits the development of law. This is because practical law is founded on experience but the scope for further experience is restricted if the first case is binding. Besides, existence of such system may make judges become thoughtless and over reliance on the doctrine of stare decisis. This is because of convenience of the doctrine and limitation of it. Thus, judges may not need to think beyond the limitation. Another disadvantage of stare decisis is there are simply too many precedents to be referred to. The citation of authority in court should be kept within reasonable bounds because it can be costly in terms of time and money. So, when there are too many precedents to be referred to, unnecessary efforts, time and money are wasted. Moreover, stare decisis is an application of argument from authority logical fallacy and can result in the preservation of cases decided wrongly.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

History of Law in Malaysia



Malaysian legal history can be traced back some six hundred years. There are three major periods that influence the current law of Malaysia. The first was the founding of the Melaka Sultanate at the beginning of the 15th century; second was the spread of Islam in the indigenous culture; and finally, and perhaps the most significant in modern Malaysia, was British colonial rule which brought with it constitutional government and the common law system.


Sultanate of Melaka

During the realm of the Sultanate, Melaka was an important trading port and the maintenance of law and order was crucial to its prosperity. The administration of justice was placed under the direct charge of the bendahara (or chief minister) who exercised both political and judicial functions. The temenggung (which is the commander of troops and police) was responsible for apprehending criminals, maintaining prisons and generally keeping the peace. The welfare of foreigners residing in the state was looked after by several shahbandars (habour masters and collectors of customs).
Little is known of the legal system in those days but it is generally accepted that the law administered then was a combination of Muslim law and the "Adat Temenggung" (patriarchal Malay customary law). The "Adat Temengung" was the law of the Sultan or the law ordained by the rulers and later adopted in the other regions of Peninsular Malaysia. It was the basis of the law as found in Malay legal digests compiled between the 15th and 19th centuries.
The formal legal text of traditional Melaka consisted of the Undang-Undang Melaka (Laws of Melaka), variously called the Hukum Kanun Melaka and Risalat Hukum Kanun, and the Undang-Undang Laut Melaka (the Maritime Laws of Melaka). The laws as written in the legal digests went through an evolutionary process. The legal rules that eventually evolved were shaped by three main influences, namely the early non-indigenous Hindu/Buddhist tradition, Islam and the indigenous "adat".
European and British Influence
When Melaka fell into the hands of the Portuguese from 1511 to 1641 and the Dutch from 1641 till 1786, the local people continued to practise Islamic laws and Malay customs. It could be said that the Portuguese and the Dutch laws made relatively little impact on the legal system as a whole other than the political and administrative structures.
In 1786, Britain acquired the island of Penarng, the first territory in Malaysia to fall into British hands. The main preoccupation of the British administrators during the first decades after the founding of Penang, was the maintenance of some form of order and to this end, local customs and law were allowed to continue but tempered by such portions of the English law as were considered just and expedient. Some judgements meted out may seem rather strange by today’s standard but it should be borne in mind that they merely reflected the harsh and often chaotic conditions of those pioneering days. Complaints and petitions were made over many years for a better system of administering justice. Finally, it came in the form of the Royal Charter of Justice of 1807. The Charter established the Court of Judicature of the Prince of Wales’ island (as Penang was then known) to exercise jurisdiction in all civil, criminal and ecclesiastical matters. It was interpreted by the courts as introducing to Penang the law of England as it stood in 1807 insofar as it was suitable to local conditions and circumstances.
When Penang, Singapore, which was founded by the British in 1819 along with Melaka, which fell to the British as a trade-off under the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824, formed the Straits Settlement in 1826, a new charter, the Charter of Justice was introduced. A new court called ‘The Court of Judicature of Prince of Wales’ Island, Singapore and Melaka" was created by this Charter. Penang in a sense had a second statutory reception of English law although it was the first for Singapore and Melaka. In one stroke of the pen, the Straits Settlements received a large dose of English law.
Despite the new Charter, the administration of justice was far from satisfactory. A third Charter of Justice was granted in 1855 which enabled the reorganisation of the court system. In 1867, when the administration of the Straits Settlements from India was transferred to the Colonial Office, the court system was reorganised once again. By Ordinance 5 of 1868, the Court of Judicature of Prince of Wales’ Island, Singapore and Melaka was abolished. A new court known as the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements was established. In 1873, the Supreme Court was further reorganised under four judges – the Chief Justice, the Justice of Penang, the Senior Puisne Judge and the Junior Puisne Judge. The Court of Quarter Sessions was established as a criminal court and presided over by the Senior and Junior Puisne Judges in Singapore and Penang respectively. A Court of Appeal was also constituted. By then, the judiciary had slowly evolved into its modern form.
English commercial law was formally introduced into the Straits Settlements by Section 6 of the Civil Law Ordinance, 1878. This provision, as re-enacted in the Civil Law Act, 1956 (Revised 1972), is still applicable in Penang and Melaka.
English land law was specifically excluded by sub-section 2. The whole section of this Ordinance was incorporated into the Civil Law Ordinance of 1909 and later re-enacted as Section 5 of the Civil Law Ordinance (Chap. 42 of the 1936 Revised Edition). This was the legal situation in the Straits Settlements until its dissolution in 1946 following the formation of the Malayan Union.
The statutory introduction of English law to the Federated Malay States comprising the states of Perak, Selangor, Pahang and Negeri Sembilan occurred in 1937 with the introduction of the Civil Law Enactment, 1937. The Unfederated Malay States, consisting the states of Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan, Terengganu and Johor, became part of the Federation of Malaya in 1948 and the Civil Law (Extension) Ordinance, 1951, extended the application of the Enactment to these states.
Both enactments were replaced by the Civil Law Ordinance, 1956, which applied to all eleven states of the Federation. When Malaysia was established in 1963, it became necessary to harmonise the law to take effect in Sabah and Sarawak. The 1956 Ordinance was then superseded by the Civil Law Act, 1956 (revised 1972) which came into force on 1 April, 1972.


The article was adapted from Wikipedia - Malaysia Legal Law