Ismail bin Brahim

On the judicial record

Shows a Court of Appeal judge engaging across contract characterisation, land-registry duties under the National Land Code, Tawarruq financing and the burden of proof in defamation, testing whether the court below applied the correct legal standard.

Ismail bin Brahim sits in the Court of Appeal, and this collection captures the wide commercial and civil range of intermediate appellate review. Contract is the largest strand, including the distinction between a contractual termination exercised under an express right to terminate and a rescission for breach, and a CIF sale-of-goods dispute over a manufacturer's duty of care where a full-container-load shipment arrived damaged. Land and tort meet in appeals on the breach of statutory duty owed by the land registry under section 378 of the National Land Code — whether reasonable care was taken to ensure the integrity of the register — and in land-reference proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act 1960 on the assessment of market value by reference to comparable sales under the First Schedule. Islamic finance features in appeals on the breach of a financing agreement structured on the Tawarruq concept, engaging the issue of Gharar and Shariah principles under the framework of the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009. Defamation appears in an appeal turning on whether the respondent proved that the appellant made the impugned statements in WhatsApp messages, and on the distinction between the legal and evidential burdens of proof. A water-supply dispute raises whether the Water Services Industry Act 2006 governed a water-supply agreement and the effect of the absence of a licence. Because the Court of Appeal sits in panels, these decisions reflect collective reasoning to which this judge contributed and guide the courts below. Private individuals are referred to by role; corporate, governmental and institutional parties are named. A recurring theme is the correct allocation of the burden of proof and the precise legal characterisation of a contractual or statutory relationship, whether the question is who bears the onus of proving a defamatory publication or whether a given transaction attracts a particular statutory regime. The collection shows how a single appellate judge engages across contract, land, Islamic finance and defamation, and how the Court of Appeal tests whether the court below characterised the relationship correctly before intervening.