Cecil Abraham & Partners’insightful publications,articles & analysis.

In this article we seek to examine the application of Section 43 and Section 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (“CJA 1964”) pertaining to the grant of interim orders by reference to the decision of the Court of Appeal of Malaysia (“Court of Appeal”) in Silver Concept Sdn Bhd v Brisdale Rasa Development Sdn Bhd (“Silver Concept”) in seeking to ascertain if the Court of Appeal has original jurisdiction to determine such applications.

The three principal branches of government in Malaysia are the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. Malaysia adheres to the principle of separation of powers where these three institutions are independent of each other. The judiciary is independent of the executive and legislature in Malaysia.

For an award to be enforceable, it must comply with the provisions of section 33 of the Arbitration Act 2005 (the 2005 Act). Pursuant to section 33 of the 2005 Act, an award must be in written form and signed by the arbitrator.

The law of arbitration in Malaysia continues to evolve as recent decisions of the national courts have sought to provide clarity concerning some key areas relating to the enforcement of arbitral awards, setting aside arbitral awards, and the granting of a stay of proceedings pending reference to arbitration.

This article analyses the judgment of the Federal Court delivered in Kolonel Dr Faiz Azraai bin Abdul Aziz v Mahkamah Tentera Divisyen Keempat Infantri Malaysia [2023] 4 MLJ 78 (“Kolonel Dr Faiz”) on 16 May 2023. This article is also an written update to our initial article entitled “What’s the meaning of “desertion” under Section 54(1)(a) of the Armed Forces Act 1972?”, as the judgment of the Federal Court has only recently become available.

This article seeks to examine the strict requirements that are to be adhered to by parties in seeking to enforce a foreign judgment by way of a common law action in Malaysia.