M
Majlis Perbandaran Selayang
Organisation 3 cases
About Majlis Perbandaran Selayang
Majlis Perbandaran Selayang appears as a party in 3 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning January 2025 to November 2025. Majlis Perbandaran Selayang appeared as defendant in 2 cases, respondent in 1 case. Cases span the High Court (3).
How many court cases involve Majlis Perbandaran Selayang?
Majlis Perbandaran Selayang appears in 3 published judgments from January 2025 to November 2025. Most commonly as defendant (2 cases).
Practice Areas
Plaintif telah berkhidmat sebagai seorang Pegawai Perubatan dengan Defendan dari 2007 sehingga 2015, apabila Plaintif telah meletakkan jawatannya atas alasan peribadi. Untuk tujuan “Mengemaskini Pencantuman Perkhidmatan”, majikan baru Plaintif telah menghubungi Defendan dan memaklumkan kepada Defendan bahawa Plaintif telah dilantik dan telah mula berkhidmat dengan pihak majikan baru tersebut dan memohon untuk diberikan satu salinan Buku Perkhidmatan Plaintif. Kedua majikan baru Plaintif serta Plaintif telah dimaklumkan oleh Defendan bahawa fail peribadi serta Buku Perkhidmatan Plaintiff telah dilupuskan oleh Defendan. 1 Atas ketidakpuasan Plaintif terhadap tindakan Defendan untuk melupuskan Buku Perkhidmatannya, Plaintiff telah memulakan tindakan sivil ini berdasarkan kausa tindakan kecuaian oleh pihak Defendan dalam mengendalikan dan melupuskan Buku Perkhidmatannya. 1 Application for interim injunction to the Respondents from evicting him from a stall managed by the Respondents. The eviction was for failure to pay rental. The Applicant failed to show there was a bona fide issue to be tried in his JR application that warranted granting the injunction. Damages would be an adequate remedy if the Applicant succeeds in his substantive application. 1 This judgment dismisses a tort action by 810 plaintiffs against 18 defendants arising from a September 2020 water disruption in Wangsa Maju, Kuala Lumpur. The High Court determined the threshold issue of locus standi after the first plaintiff (PW-1), a former Member of Parliament, testified as sole witness. The Court held this was a private law tort action requiring strict standing requirements, not public interest litigation. PW-1 lacked personal standing, having resided outside the affected area with no personal water disruption. The action failed as a representative proceeding under Order 15 Rule 12 ROC 2012, lacked endorsement under Order 6 Rule 2(1)(b) and proper authorization. The remaining 809 plaintiffs adduced no evidence and defects emerged where 103 plaintiffs with non-existent identity card numbers, 8 deceased plaintiffs, 3 undischarged bankrupts without DGI sanction, and 8 residing outside the affected area. PW-1 admitted inability to prove any claim and lacked written authorisation from the plaintiffs. 1 Locus standi; representative action; tort; private law standing; Order 15 Rule 12; Order 6 Rule 2(1)(b); costs 1
Defendant (2)
wa-21ncvc-80-04-2021 MYHC
1. ) DATIN PADUKA DR. TAN YEE KEW 2. ) VIJAYA KUMARI A/P KANNIPAN 3. ) LEE CHUN TACK 4. ) RAZALI BIN ABU BAKAR 5. ) ASMUNI BIN NAFIAH 6. ) DEWI MURNI HARUN 7. ) VASANDA A/P VYTHILIGAM 8. ) MOHAMED NOORSYAFIQ BIN SHAMSUDIN 9. ) THULOSIMANY 10. ) SABRINA BINTI SAHUL HAMID 11. ) KALADEVI A/P RAMACHANTHIRAN 12. ) VELLAMMAL A/P VADAMALAY 13. ) RAJA NORSIDAH BT RAJA ABDUL JALIL 14. ) SITI NORWANA BINTI ZAKARIA 15. ) NUR AFIQAH BINIL MOHTAR APANDI 16. ) TAMIL SELVI A/P SUBRAMANIAM 17. ) MUNIAMAH A/P...
3 November 2025
ba-21ncvc-19-04-2023 MYHC
RAZIF BIN ZAINOL ABIDIN v Majlis Perbandaran Selayang
5 January 2025