Complete This Week’s Task

Introduction to Law and the Malaysian Legal System

1. Does the common law of England apply in Malaysia? Give reasons for your answer.

2. When do judges get the opportunity to make new laws?

3. Define the following terms:

a) obiter dicta
b) ratio decidendi
c) appellant
d) respondent
e) plaintiff
f) defendant

4. Explain the doctrine of precedent. How does it work?

5. Read the case of Tan Hock Leng v RHB Bank Bhd [2016] 8 CLJ 577 (the case is
available on Moodle) and answer the following:

a) What were the facts of the case?

b) What did the court decide?
c) What reasons did the court give for deciding the way it did?
d) Would the decision bind:
- The Magistrates Court;
- The Court of Appeal;
- The High Court;
- The Sessions Court;

6. Are the following statements true or false?

1) Malaysian legal history began with the British Occupation of Malaya.

2) With enactment of the Civil Law Act 1956, English common law and rules of
equity were no more applicable in Malaysia.
3) If there is no written law in Malaysia, the courts must apply the common law
and rules of equity in England as on 7 April 1949.
4) The legislature (Parliament) may pass a federal law to limit the judicial powers of
the court because under article 121(1) of the Federal Constitution the judicial
power is not vested in the judiciary.
5) The highest law in Malaysia is the Federal Constitution.
6) The long title, the preamble and the schedules to a statute are intrinsic aids for
the purposes of its interpretation.
7) If there is no written law, the Courts of Sabah and Sarawak shall apply the
common law of England and the rules of equity together with the statutes as
administered in England on 1.12.1951 and 12.12.1949 respectively.
8) The Federal Constitution provides for the separation of powers between the
Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary.
9) The golden rule of interpretation avoids the consequences of literal
interpretation of words which may lead to a manifest absurdity.
10) Mischief rule in statutory interpretation serves to determine the mischief and
defect that a statute in question actually has set out to remedy.