Farah, Farhana & Company
Contact Information
About Farah, Farhana & Company
Farah, Farhana & Company appears in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2024–2025). These were heard before MYCOA (3).
On the court record
The firm's record illustrates the reformed procedure for challenging Industrial Court awards after the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2020, and the threshold for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal under section 68 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.
Farah, Farhana & Company appears in the corpus as counsel in regulatory and employment litigation, argued before the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan).
One matter concerned leave to appeal. Acting for the appellant, the firm appeared where the court considered an application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal under section 68(1)(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, and whether there was a prima facie case of error, in a dispute engaging the Medical Device Act 2012 and the Medical Act 1971, public policy, and the effect of sections 24 and 66 of the Contracts Act 1950 on an agreement said to be unlawful or void.
The firm also appeared, acting for the respondent, in connected industrial-relations appeals concerning wrongful dismissal. There the central question was one of procedure of real practical importance: whether the correct mode of challenging an award of the Industrial Court is by way of judicial review or by an appeal to the High Court, following the amendments introduced by the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2020. The court examined sections 20(2) and 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 and the new sections 33C and 35 introduced by the amending Act, which reshaped the route by which a dissatisfied party may take an Industrial Court award to the higher courts.
The question of the proper avenue of challenge is not merely technical, since choosing the wrong route can be fatal to a party's ability to have the award reviewed at all, and the transition brought about by the 2020 amendments generated genuine uncertainty that the courts have had to resolve. The firm's record is a regulatory-and-employment litigation practice, engaging both the threshold requirements for a second appeal and the reformed procedure for challenging Industrial Court awards, a field of direct significance to dismissed employees and their employers alike.
How many cases has Farah, Farhana & Company been involved in?
Farah, Farhana & Company appears in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2024–2025).
Which courts does Farah, Farhana & Company appear in?
Farah, Farhana & Company appears before MYCOA (3).
What areas does Farah, Farhana & Company cover in the reported cases?
The firm appears in regulatory and employment litigation, including an application for leave to appeal engaging the Medical Device Act 2012 and the Contracts Act 1950, and industrial-relations appeals on the mode of challenging an Industrial Court award.
What procedural question arose in the firm's industrial-relations appeals?
The central question was whether an award of the Industrial Court should be challenged by judicial review or by an appeal to the High Court, examining sections 20(2) and 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 and the new sections 33C and 35 introduced by the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2020.
What did the firm's leave-to-appeal matter engage?
The court considered leave to appeal under section 68(1)(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 and whether there was a prima facie case of error, in a dispute engaging the Medical Device Act 2012, the Medical Act 1971, and the effect of sections 24 and 66 of the Contracts Act 1950 on an unlawful agreement.