Latifah binti Haji Mohd Tahar

On the judicial record

Shows a judge working at both High Court and Court of Appeal level across drug trafficking, minimal-intervention arbitration, liquidation under the Companies Act 1965, and stays of execution, applying a consistent standard of intervention.

Latifah binti Haji Mohd Tahar appears in this collection sitting in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal, and the docket combines serious criminal trials and appeals with commercial and insolvency work. Drug prosecutions under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, framed in the judgments as pengedaran dadah berbahaya (trafficking in dangerous drugs), are a substantial strand, including trafficking in methamphetamine. On the commercial side, arbitration and construction-payment law recur: the Court of Appeal reaffirmed the principle of minimal curial intervention in arbitration, holding that a procedural breach such as an alleged short delay did not warrant setting an award aside, and appeals arose from decisions setting aside or enforcing an adjudication decision. Company and insolvency work features through the retrospective ratification of a liquidator's fees under the winding-up provisions of the Companies Act 1965 and the rules made under it, and the wholesale delegation of liquidation duties. Civil-procedure appeals include applications for a stay of execution of a money judgment pending appeal and whether special circumstances were shown, and appeals in judicial-review proceedings. Because the Court of Appeal sits in panels and its rulings bind or guide the courts below, the appellate decisions settle points of general importance, while the High Court trials show the same judge at first instance. Accused persons and private litigants are referred to by role; corporate, governmental and statutory parties are named. A recurring theme is restraint — the court's reluctance to interfere with an arbitral award or a lower-court decision absent a demonstrated error or special circumstances, a principle that surfaces whether the question is setting aside an award, enforcing an adjudication decision, or staying execution of a money judgment pending appeal. The collection is valuable for showing how a judge works at two levels of the court hierarchy, across drug crime, arbitration, insolvency and civil procedure, and applies a consistent standard of intervention throughout, from the trial of a first-instance matter to the review of a decision made below.