Steven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership

On the court record

Steven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership is a Malaysian firm whose reported matters before the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) span contract, administrative law, land and tort. In the contract field it has appeared in a dispute over the termination of a security-services contract, engaging whether the termination was unlawful and the immigration-compliance framework governing the security guards' work permits, including the Visit Pass (Temporary Employment) sequence and the FOMEMA and immigration systems. Its administrative-law practice includes judicial reviews testing whether a decision existed at the time an application was filed and whether the application was time-barred, whether a regulator's power to investigate is a discretionary power amenable to review, and the function of the High Court on judicial review and the mandatory requirements of Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012.

The firm's land and tort work is substantial. It has appeared, at the Court of Appeal, in land-reference proceedings concerning whether an electricity utility acting as paymaster had standing to intervene as a person interested under section 37 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 without filing the prescribed form, and in a matter on late-payment interest under the Electricity Supply Act 1990 for delayed wayleave compensation and the landowner's right to adequate compensation under Article 13(2) of the Federal Constitution. It has also litigated whether a developer owes a tortious duty of care to purchasers to ensure that housing parcels are safe for habitation, and a striking-out application engaging the definition of a disciplinary offence under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010.

The reported profile is that of a commercial and public-law litigation practice engaged with contract termination and regulatory compliance, judicial review, land acquisition and compensation, and the tortious duties of developers, with a recurring focus on the standing of interested parties and the constitutional right to adequate compensation.