Ann Joo Steel Berhad
About Ann Joo Steel Berhad
Ann Joo Steel Berhad appears in 3 reported Malaysia court cases (2019–2025). Ann Joo Steel Berhad is recorded as Applicant (1), Defendant (1) and Appellant (1). These cases were heard before MYHC (2) and MYFC (1).
On the court record
A steel producer whose matters span criminal revision over an allegedly defective charge, a RM11.98m loss-of-profits award for wrongful contract termination, and a land-title jurisdiction appeal.
Ann Joo Steel Berhad, a steel producer, appears in the corpus across criminal-revision, commercial-contract and land-jurisdiction matters, giving an unusually broad picture of a manufacturer's litigation. In a criminal-revision matter the company applied to the High Court, and the court framed the issues in Bahasa Malaysia as a permohonan semakan jenayah (application for criminal revision) turning on whether the charge against the applicant was cacat, tidak lengkap atau tidak berasas (defective, incomplete or without basis), whether the Sessions Court's refusal of an application under section 173(g) of the Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (the Criminal Procedure Code) was wrong in law or procedure, and whether the charge prejudiced the applicant's right to a fair and proper trial according to law.
On the commercial side, in AMSTEEL MILLS Sdn Bhd v Ann Joo Steel Berhad the court dealt with the interpretation of contracts, unjust enrichment and the assessment of loss of profits arising from the termination of steel-billet supply contracts. It held that the two contracts were separate rather than interlocking, found no justification for the termination, rejected the unjust-enrichment claim for lack of evidence, and awarded RM11,984,818.00 for loss of profits as foreseeable damages flowing from the termination. Separately, in a Federal Court appeal the company was drawn into a land dispute engaging the National Land Code (Penang and Malacca Titles) Act 1963 and the validity of a 1995 High Court order challenged years later as made in excess of jurisdiction.
The cluster is instructive because it shows the same corporate party navigating three distinct regimes — criminal procedure, commercial-contract damages, and land-title jurisdiction. The company is named as it appears on the record; individual parties are referred to by their procedural role only. The breadth of the company's litigation — from a criminal-revision application testing the validity of a charge, through a substantial loss-of-profits award for wrongful termination, to a land-title appeal turning on a decades-old order — is a reminder that a large manufacturer's legal exposure is not confined to commercial contract, but reaches across the criminal, civil and land jurisdictions of the courts.
How many Malaysia court cases involve Ann Joo Steel Berhad?
Ann Joo Steel Berhad appears in 3 reported Malaysia court cases (2019–2025).
Which courts does Ann Joo Steel Berhad appear in?
Ann Joo Steel Berhad appears before MYHC (2) and MYFC (1).
What did the court award in the AMSTEEL MILLS supply-contract dispute?
Finding the two steel-billet supply contracts separate and the termination unjustified, and rejecting the unjust-enrichment claim for lack of evidence, the court awarded RM11,984,818.00 for loss of profits as foreseeable damages caused by the termination.
What was in issue in the company's criminal-revision application?
Whether the charge was defective, incomplete or without basis, whether the Sessions Court erred in refusing an application under section 173(g) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and whether the charge prejudiced the applicant's right to a fair trial according to law.