Faizah binti Jamaludin

On the judicial record

An appellate judge whose reported corpus centres on corporate insolvency, constitutional property rights under Article 13, and the integrity of court process.

Justice Faizah binti Jamaludin sits mainly in the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan), with some High Court work, and the reported decisions in this corpus are strongly commercial and constitutional-administrative in character. Company and insolvency law is central. A group of appeals concerns an application for leave to convene a meeting of a scheme of creditors for a company in liquidation and the setting aside of the order granting that leave, brought by several financial-institution creditors, raising the correctness of the High Court's refusal to set the leave aside. Other company appeals examine the lifting of the corporate veil where companies operated as a single unified entity with shared resources, branding, administration and a common payroll to conceal the true facts or evade obligations.

Constitutional and administrative questions feature prominently. One appeal concerns the right to property under Article 13(1) of the Federal Constitution and the deprivation of land by forfeiture, treated as quasi-criminal in nature and requiring strict compliance with constitutional safeguards and Wednesbury reasonableness, where the forfeiture followed an admitted mistake by the Land Office.

The corpus also engages the administration of justice itself: an application to recuse a High Court judge and to expunge parts of a judgment, arising in circumstances where a short audio-video clip of trial proceedings had circulated. Estate and pleading disputes appear too, including a strike-out application under Order 18 rule 19 of the Rules of Court in a claim by dissatisfied stakeholders over monies connected to a joint-venture agreement, and an appeal involving the lifting of the veil against a transport company sued by many claimants. Land-acquisition and compensation questions also come before the panel, including a challenge to the constitutionality and fairness of the process by which acquired land was dealt with. The overall impression is of an appellate judge whose reported work concentrates on corporate insolvency, constitutional property rights and the integrity of court process, decided on close attention to the governing statute and the safeguards it imposes.