ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review
36 cases · February 2020 to January 2026
Case Volume by Year
1 20
1 24
33 25
1 26
2020–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Certiorari — Investigation conducted by Malaysia Competition Commission regarding complaints against company for bid rigging –Proposed decision issued — Proposed decision challenged for invalid investigation — When challenge available — Procedural impropriety — Sections 14, 15, 18, 36, and 40 of the Competition Act 2010 8 Leave to commence judicial review proceedings for certiorari — Investigation officer issued freezing order — Deputy Public Prosecutor issued seizure orders — Whether decision amenable to judicial review — Whether arguable case for mala fide shown — Insufficiency of pleading — sections 44(1) and 50(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 2 Application for leave to commence judicial review — Certiorari — Declaration — No reasons for decision to be reviewed — Application for reasons — No response from decision maker 1 Certiorari and Mandamus — Dismissal from service — Police officer convicted of khalwat in Syariah Court — Disciplinary Board imposed punishment of dismissal — Whether applicant was denied the right to be heard — Exceptions to the right to be heard under proviso (a) to art 135(2) of the Federal Constitution PUBLIC SERVANTS: Disciplinary proceedings — Dismissal — Police officer convicted of criminal offence in Syariah Court — Evaluation of punishment CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings — Bound by pleadings — Unpleaded issues — Application for judicial review — Applicant raised issue of denial of right to be heard during submissions — Issue not pleaded in original statement filed under O. 53 r. 3(2) of the Rules of Court 2012 — CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment — Statement in judicial review — Application to amend statement late in proceedings to include unpleaded ground — Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 r. 7 — CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judicial review — Interlocutory application — Cross-examination of deponent — Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 r. 6 — Application to cross-examine deponent to obtain statistics on dismissal of other police officers 1 Certiorari and Mandamus — Transfer of public officer in Armed Forces — Whether transfer order constitutes non-justiciable management prerogative — Applicant challenged transfer based on personal hardship — Whether court can intervene in deployment of military personnel ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Remedies — Exhaustion of domestic remedies — Applicant challenged disciplinary actions (“Loose Arrest” and Absence Without Leave charge) prior to conclusion of Summary Trial — Whether application premature — Mandatory statutory remedy under s. 130 Armed Forces Act 1972 — Failure to appeal to Armed Forces Council — Whether judicial review can supplant statutory appeal process CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings — Judicial Review — Applicant raised new factual allegations during oral submissions regarding conduct of trial and prior reporting for duty — Whether applicant bound by facts pleaded in Statement filed under O. 53 r. 3(2) Rules of Court 2012 — Effect of failure to plead material facts 1 Certiorari — Late delivery of vacant possession — Liquidated ascertained damages — Schedule G Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 — Settlement agreement — Contemporaneous documents — Housing Development (Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims) Regulations 2002 1 Certiorari — Minister excluded period under subsection 38C(1) of the Temporary Measures For Reducing The Impact Of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020 (“COVID-19 Act”) — Date of Sale and Purchase Agreement for the purposes of Liquid Ascertained Damages — Whether illegality or irrationality shown 1 Housing developers — Certiorari — Minister excluded period under subsection 35(1) and 38C(1) of the Temporary Measures For Reducing The Impact Of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020 (“COVID-19 Act”) — Date of Sale and Purchase Agreement for the purposes of Liquid Ascertained Damages — Whether illegality or irrationality shown — Whether ought to interfere with exercise of discretion to refuse adjournment 1 Leave to commence judicial review proceedings for certiorari — Claim for damages included — Whether claim for damages sufficiently pleaded — Order 53 Rule 5 of the Rules of Court 2012. 1 Action under section 354 of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (“CMSA”) — Guilty of breach and punished — Grounds of review — Breach of natural justice — Error in evaluating evidence — Effect of grounds not state in Order 53 Statement — Capital Market Services Licence — Central Depository System Account — Sections 3, 15 and 16 of the Securities Commission Malaysia Act 1993 — Section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 1 Application for — Challenging validity of fatwa — Whether the Fatwa on a whole is valid having regard to the fact that it purports to suggest that certain federal authorities take specific action against the first appellant (specifically) and other persons (including the second appellant) generally — Whether the fatwa could legally apply to SIS Forum (Malaysia) (a company limited by guarantee, i.e., an artificial legal person) and non-Muslim individuals — Whether the fatwa could — Direct federal agencies to block social media content — Mandate confiscation of publications (a power reserved under federal laws like the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984) — Whether a gazetted fatwa (under Section 49, ARIE 2003) qualifies as subsidiary legislation and is thus reviewable for Constitutionality — Reasonableness. 1 Certiorari to quash restriction order — Wording of condition in the statute different from wording in restriction order — Whether restriction order rendered invalid — Restricted person not conveyed to place of restriction according to stipulate time –Whether detention rendered invalid — Sections 6(3) and 6(3A) of the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 1 Certiorari — Late delivery of vacant possession — Liquidated ascertained damages — Schedule G Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 — Settlement agreement — Contemporaneous documents — Housing Development (Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims) Regulations 2002. 1 State Authority — Approval of logging area — Licence to take away forest produce — Licensee different entity — Applicants rights under private agreement — Licensee did not appoint contractor to extract forest produce — Role of State Director of Forestry — Timber — Locus standi — Whether proper parties sued — Sections 3(1), 14, 15(1), 16 18, 19, 22, 23 of the National Forestry Act 1984 1 Charge dealt with summarily — Disobedience of standing order — Right to be heard — Punishment — Fairness of procedure — Right to be heard — Sentence and proportionality — Sections 51(1), 95 and 98 of the Armed Forces Act 1972 — Rules 36, 36 of the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules of Procedure 1976 1 Application for mandamus — Documents concerning a Concession Agreement to build a highway — Locus standi — Whether residents of surrounding areas entitled documents by a mandamus order — Social Impact Assessment Report — Environmental Impact Assessment Report — Traffic Impact Assessment Report — Minutes of Focus Group Discussions organised by concession company — Concession Agreement 1 Certiorari — Bill of Demand — Licensed (Bonded) Manufacturing Warehouse — Licensed (Bonded ) Warehouse — Principal Customs Area — Free Industrial Zone — Foreign company GST registered — Whether located in Malaysia or foreign company — Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 (“GST Act”) — Whether taxpayer entitled to zero rate treatment under section 17(1)(b) of the GST Act — Whether GST Act to be read as one with the Customs Act 1967 — Free Zones Act 1990 1 Minister prohibited absolutely book — Section 7(1) of the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984 — Ground for prohibition order — Likely to be prejudicial to morality — Meaning of “likely to be prejudicial” and “morality” — Test to be applied — Whether Minister’s decision tainted with illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety and proportionality. 1 Development plans — Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan 2020 — Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020 (KLCP) or local plan — Non-compliance with statutory provisions — section 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982 (FTP Act) — New amendments made without hearing objections from the public — Interpretation of section 16(1) of the FTP Act — Substantive locus standi — Whether public interest litigation — Appropriate reliefs 1 Termination of probationer — Regulation 48, Subregulation 50(1) and Regulation 52 of the Public Officers (Appointment, Promotion and Termination of Service) Regulations 2012 — Whether prerequisites satisfied to justify termination 1
+ 8 more
Certiorari — Investigation conducted by Malaysia Competition Commission regarding complaints against company for bid rigging –Proposed decision issued — Proposed decision challenged for invalid investigation — When challenge available — Procedural impropriety — Sections 14, 15, 18, 36, and 40 of the Competition Act 2010 8 cases
wa-25-206-05-2024 PINTAS UTAMA SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
wa-25-212-05-2024 KIARA KILAT SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
wa-25-230-05-2024 MANGKUBUMI SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
wa-25-231-05-2024 IDX MULTI RESOURCES SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
wa-25-232-05-2024 MENANG IDAMAN SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
+ 3 more cases
Leave to commence judicial review proceedings for certiorari — Investigation officer issued freezing order — Deputy Public Prosecutor issued seizure orders — Whether decision amenable to judicial review — Whether arguable case for mala fide shown — Insufficiency of pleading — sections 44(1) and 50(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 2 cases
wa-25-125-05-2025 AHMAD ZAKWAN BIN MOHAMAD SHARIF v 1. ) INSPEKTOR NUR HAIDY BIN OMAR 2. ) DCP DATO MUHAMMAD HASBULLAH BIN ALI 3. ) IG TAN SRI RAZARUDIN BIN HUSAIN @ ABDUL RASHID 4. ) ROZALIANA BINTI ZAKARIA 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
20 August 2025
wa-25-126-05-2025 CHIP IN SDN BHD v 1. ) INSPEKTOR NUR HAIDY BIN OMAR 2. ) DCP DATO MUHAMMAD HASBULLAH BIN ALI 3. ) IG TAN SRI RAZARUDIN BIN HUSAIN @ ABDUL RASHID 4. ) ROZALIANA BINTI ZAKARIA 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
20 August 2025
Application for leave to commence judicial review — Certiorari — Declaration — No reasons for decision to be reviewed — Application for reasons — No response from decision maker 1 case
Certiorari and Mandamus — Dismissal from service — Police officer convicted of khalwat in Syariah Court — Disciplinary Board imposed punishment of dismissal — Whether applicant was denied the right to be heard — Exceptions to the right to be heard under proviso (a) to art 135(2) of the Federal Constitution PUBLIC SERVANTS: Disciplinary proceedings — Dismissal — Police officer convicted of criminal offence in Syariah Court — Evaluation of punishment CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings — Bound by pleadings — Unpleaded issues — Application for judicial review — Applicant raised issue of denial of right to be heard during submissions — Issue not pleaded in original statement filed under O. 53 r. 3(2) of the Rules of Court 2012 — CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment — Statement in judicial review — Application to amend statement late in proceedings to include unpleaded ground — Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 r. 7 — CIVIL PROCEDURE: Judicial review — Interlocutory application — Cross-examination of deponent — Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 r. 6 — Application to cross-examine deponent to obtain statistics on dismissal of other police officers 1 case
Certiorari and Mandamus — Transfer of public officer in Armed Forces — Whether transfer order constitutes non-justiciable management prerogative — Applicant challenged transfer based on personal hardship — Whether court can intervene in deployment of military personnel ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Remedies — Exhaustion of domestic remedies — Applicant challenged disciplinary actions (“Loose Arrest” and Absence Without Leave charge) prior to conclusion of Summary Trial — Whether application premature — Mandatory statutory remedy under s. 130 Armed Forces Act 1972 — Failure to appeal to Armed Forces Council — Whether judicial review can supplant statutory appeal process CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings — Judicial Review — Applicant raised new factual allegations during oral submissions regarding conduct of trial and prior reporting for duty — Whether applicant bound by facts pleaded in Statement filed under O. 53 r. 3(2) Rules of Court 2012 — Effect of failure to plead material facts 1 case
Certiorari — Late delivery of vacant possession — Liquidated ascertained damages — Schedule G Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 — Settlement agreement — Contemporaneous documents — Housing Development (Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims) Regulations 2002 1 case
Leave to commence judicial review proceedings for certiorari — Claim for damages included — Whether claim for damages sufficiently pleaded — Order 53 Rule 5 of the Rules of Court 2012. 1 case
Action under section 354 of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (“CMSA”) — Guilty of breach and punished — Grounds of review — Breach of natural justice — Error in evaluating evidence — Effect of grounds not state in Order 53 Statement — Capital Market Services Licence — Central Depository System Account — Sections 3, 15 and 16 of the Securities Commission Malaysia Act 1993 — Section 25(4) of the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 1 case
Certiorari to quash restriction order — Wording of condition in the statute different from wording in restriction order — Whether restriction order rendered invalid — Restricted person not conveyed to place of restriction according to stipulate time –Whether detention rendered invalid — Sections 6(3) and 6(3A) of the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 1 case
Certiorari — Late delivery of vacant possession — Liquidated ascertained damages — Schedule G Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Regulations 1989 — Settlement agreement — Contemporaneous documents — Housing Development (Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims) Regulations 2002. 1 case
Charge dealt with summarily — Disobedience of standing order — Right to be heard — Punishment — Fairness of procedure — Right to be heard — Sentence and proportionality — Sections 51(1), 95 and 98 of the Armed Forces Act 1972 — Rules 36, 36 of the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules of Procedure 1976 1 case
Certiorari — Bill of Demand — Licensed (Bonded) Manufacturing Warehouse — Licensed (Bonded ) Warehouse — Principal Customs Area — Free Industrial Zone — Foreign company GST registered — Whether located in Malaysia or foreign company — Goods and Services Tax Act 2014 (“GST Act”) — Whether taxpayer entitled to zero rate treatment under section 17(1)(b) of the GST Act — Whether GST Act to be read as one with the Customs Act 1967 — Free Zones Act 1990 1 case
Minister prohibited absolutely book — Section 7(1) of the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984 — Ground for prohibition order — Likely to be prejudicial to morality — Meaning of “likely to be prejudicial” and “morality” — Test to be applied — Whether Minister’s decision tainted with illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety and proportionality. 1 case
Development plans — Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan 2020 — Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020 (KLCP) or local plan — Non-compliance with statutory provisions — section 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982 (FTP Act) — New amendments made without hearing objections from the public — Interpretation of section 16(1) of the FTP Act — Substantive locus standi — Whether public interest litigation — Appropriate reliefs 1 case
Termination of probationer — Regulation 48, Subregulation 50(1) and Regulation 52 of the Public Officers (Appointment, Promotion and Termination of Service) Regulations 2012 — Whether prerequisites satisfied to justify termination 1 case
Application for planning permission — Conditions attached — Appeal to the Federal Territory Appeal Board — Appeal allowed — Application for leave out of time — Test — No good reason to extend time — Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982 — Order 53 Rules 3(6) and (7) of the Rules of Court 2012 1 case
Securities Industry Dispute Resolution Centre’s (“SIDREC”) — Adjudication of dispute between investor and Member of SIDREC — Adjudication award — Appeal to SIDREC’s Appeals Committee (“SIAC”) — Judicial review against decision of SIAC — Whether liability appealable when claimant successful — Whether subject of review circumscribed by jurisdiction of SIAC to hear appeals on serious errors of law and fact — Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 — Capital Markets and Services (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2010 — Terms of Reference (Rules for SIDREC and SIAC) of the Security Industry Dispute Resolution Centre 1 case
Mandamus — Public services — Pensions — Pension Adjustment — Res Judicata — Service Circulars — Sections 3 and 6 of the Pensions Adjustment Act 1980 1 case
Declaration that restriction order null and void — Statement of “grounds and allegations of facts” not attached to restriction order — Whether such statement mandatory — Time taken to produce report — Time taken to issue restriction order — Whether inordinate — Whether witness statement properly recorded — Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 of the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 1 case
Mandamus — Commission of Enquiry — Terms of reference — Section 18 of the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 — Commission concluded — Right of representation — Whether matter academic 1 case
Civil Service — Civil service circulars — Application for leave — Test — Failure to meet qualifications for promotion — Annual appraisal — Whether non-justiciable — Mandamus — Rules of Court 2012, O. 53 r. 3(6) 1 case
Appeal — Judicial review against decision of Director General of Inland Revenue ('DGIR') — Whether the taxpayer’s application for judicial review had merit — Whether the availability of a domestic remedy under the Income Tax Act 1967 (“ITA”) precluded the taxpayer from seeking judicial review — Whether the DGIR’s decision or conduct in issuing the disputed notices was tainted with illegality — judicial review was appropriate due to the illegality of the appellant’s actions (double taxation) — the existence of an alternative remedy (appeal to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, or SCIT) did not preclude judicial review, especially where there was clear illegality. 1 case
Challenge against decision of Director General of National Registration (‘DGNR’) — Application by Malay Muslim illegitimate child — Application to enter name of father of child in child’s Birth Register — DGNR issued child’s birth certificate and entered child’s full name with ‘bin Abdullah’ instead of ‘bin’ father’s name — Application to correct child’s name from ‘bin Abdullah’ to ‘bin’ father’s name dismissed by DGNR — Whether DGNR’s refusal to correct or alter particulars ‘bin Abdullah’ to be substituted with ‘bin’ father’s name in Birth Register made in accordance with law — Whether s. 13A of Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 (‘BDRA’) applies to registration of births of Muslim children — Whether enabling child to be named with personal name of person acknowledged to be father of child — Whether ‘surname’ in s. 13A of BDRA includes patronymic surnames — Whether Malays have surnames CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties — Personal liberty — Challenge against decision of Director General of National Registration (‘DGNR’) — Application by Malay Muslim illegitimate child — Application to enter name of father of child in child’s Birth Register — DGNR issued child’s birth certificate and entered child’s full name with ‘bin Abdullah’ instead of ‘bin’ father’s name — Child’s birth certificate contained notation ‘Permohonan Seksyen 13’ as acknowledgment of registration of birth for illegitimate child — Whether entry of ‘bin Abdullah’ and notation ‘Permohonan Seksyen 13’ in child’s birth certificate infringed child’s fundamental liberties ISLAMIC LAW: Legislation — Islamic law of State — Challenge against decision of Director General of National Registration (‘DGNR’) — Application by Malay Muslim illegitimate child — Application to enter name of father of child in child’s Birth Register — DGNR issued child’s birth certificate and entered child’s full name with ‘bin Abdullah’ instead of ‘bin’ father’s name — Child’s birth certificate contained notation ‘Permohonan Seksyen 13’ as acknowledgment of registration of birth for illegitimate child — DGNR relied on fatwa by National Fatwa Committee (‘NFC’) in arriving at decision — Whether, in performing registration of births of Muslim children, Registrar of Births and Deaths may refer to and rely on sources of Islamic law on legitimacy — Whether DGNR could rely on fatwa by NFC when child is subjected to Islamic laws of State — Whether illegitimate Muslim child could be ascribed to name of father in Islam — Islamic Family Law (State of Johor) Enactment 2003, ss. 52 & 111 1 case
Key Statutes
Federal Constitution
cited in 3 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
cited in 1 case Printing
Presses and Publications Act 1984
cited in 1 case Communications and Multimedia Act 1998
cited in 1 case Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
cited in 1 case Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Top Firms
Cases
Page 1 of 2wa-25-296-08-2025
1. ) NORAN BINTI ABU BAKAR SEDIK 2. ) Abidin @ Azlan Bin Ismail v PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, KUALA LUMPUR
25 January 2026
MYHC
ka-25-22-12-2023
MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN ZAILANI v 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA BUKIT AMAN 3. ) KETUA POLIS NEGARA, MALAYSIA 4. ) KETUA POLIS NEGERI KEDAH 5. ) Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)
16 December 2025
MYHC
ka-25-14-10-2024
AMIRUL SYAHMI BIN ROSLEE v 1. ) LEFTENAN KOLONEL MUHAMMAD BASHIRUDDIN BIN JAMALUDIN, PEGAWAI MEMERINTAH, BATALION KEENAM REJIMEN ASKAR DIRAJA 2. ) BRIGEDIER JENERAL SAIFUL BAHARI BIN ZAINOL, PENGARAH INFANTRI, MARKAS TENTERA DARAT (MKTD) 3. ) ANGKATAN TENTERA MALAYSIA
22 November 2025
MYHC
wa-25-368-11-2023
RAKAN SETIA HOUSING SDN. BHD. v 1. ) MUHAMMAD NOORAHIM BIN SHUKOR 2. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH
5 November 2025
MYHC
wa-25-334-08-2024
MONTY PROPERTIES SDN BHD v 1. ) TEE ZHI LUN 2. ) CHOONG JO YI 3. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH
21 September 2025
MYHC
wa-25-335-08-2024
MONTY PROPERTIES SDN BHD v 1. ) HO CHUAN WOON 2. ) TAN BEE LAN 3. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH
21 September 2025
MYHC
wa-25-125-05-2025
AHMAD ZAKWAN BIN MOHAMAD SHARIF v 1. ) INSPEKTOR NUR HAIDY BIN OMAR 2. ) DCP DATO MUHAMMAD HASBULLAH BIN ALI 3. ) IG TAN SRI RAZARUDIN BIN HUSAIN @ ABDUL RASHID 4. ) ROZALIANA BINTI ZAKARIA 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
20 August 2025
MYHC
wa-25-126-05-2025
CHIP IN SDN BHD v 1. ) INSPEKTOR NUR HAIDY BIN OMAR 2. ) DCP DATO MUHAMMAD HASBULLAH BIN ALI 3. ) IG TAN SRI RAZARUDIN BIN HUSAIN @ ABDUL RASHID 4. ) ROZALIANA BINTI ZAKARIA 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
20 August 2025
MYHC
wa-25-114-05-2025
Katana Films (M) Sdn Bhd v Perbadanan Kemajuan Filem Nasional Malaysia
13 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-206-05-2024
PINTAS UTAMA SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-212-05-2024
KIARA KILAT SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-230-05-2024
MANGKUBUMI SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-231-05-2024
IDX MULTI RESOURCES SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-232-05-2024
MENANG IDAMAN SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN Kementerian Kewangan
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-233-05-2024
MERANTI BUDIMAN SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) Kementerian Kewangan 2. ) Kementerian Peralihan Tenaga Dan Transformasi Air
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-234-05-2024
DUTAMESRA BINA SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-235-05-2024
NYL CORPORATION SDN BHD v SURUHANJAYA PERSAINGAN MALAYSIA
6 July 2025
MYHC
wa-25-275-07-2024
1. ) ABDUL RADZIM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 2. ) NOR ASHIKIN BINTI KHAMIS v Suruhanjaya Sekuriti Malaysia
22 June 2025
MYHC
01f-23-09-2023w
1. ) SIS FORUM (MALAYSIA) 2. ) XXXX v 1. ) XXXX 2. ) MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR 3. ) Kerajaan Negeri Selangor
18 June 2025
MYFC
wa-25-276-07-2024
MUHAMMAD FARIS BIN CHE SHAARI v 1. ) TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA 2. ) KETUA POLIS NEGERI KELANTAN 3. ) KETUA POLIS NEGARA 4. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
17 June 2025
MYHC
wa-25-364-11-2023
RAKAN SETIA HOUSING SDN. BHD. v 1. ) JUANI BIN JUHADI 2. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH
19 May 2025
MYHC
wa-25-565-11-2022
1. ) ROSAH TIMBER & TRADING SDN BHD 2. ) BEIJING MILIION SDN BHD v 1. ) PENGARAH PERHUTANAN, PAHANG 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Pahang 3. ) YAYASAN PAHANG
28 April 2025
MYHC
wa-25-145-04-2024
LT KDR MOHD AFIZAL BIN AZIZ v 1. ) KDR MAZENI BINTI SAARI TLDM 2. ) LAKSAMANA PERTAMA AZHAR BIN ADAM 3. ) PANGLIMA TENTERA LAUT 4. ) MAJLIS ANGKATAN TENTERA
27 April 2025
MYHC
wa-25-144-06-2023
1. ) Chakaravarthi a/l Thillainathan 2. ) Kum Koo Ji 3. ) Saktiseelan a/l Shivasubramaniam 4. ) Loke Yin Pong v 1. ) Ketua Pengarah Perancangan Bandar Dan Desa 2. ) Pengarah Jabatan Perancangan Bandar Dan Desa, Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan 3. ) Kerajaan Negeri Selangor 4. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
25 March 2025
MYHC
wa-25-536-10-2022
MCE Technologies Sdn Bhd v 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN KASTAM DIRAJA MALAYSIA 2. ) PENGARAH KASTAM NEGERI JOHOR, JABATAN KASTAM DIRAJA MALAYSIA
24 March 2025
MYHC