UNIVERSITI MALAYA

PEPERIKSAAN
IJAZAH SARJANA MUDA JURISPRUDENS

SESI AKADEMIK 2020/2021

LIB 2011: Undang-undang Pentadbiran

September 2021 Masa: 8 jam

ARAHAN KEPADA CALON:

Jawab TIGA (3) soalan sahaja

Jangkamasa peperiksaan ini adalah dengan ketatnya ditetapkan

selama 8 jam.

Calon dikehendaki menggunakan 6 jam pertama untuk

melengkapkan jawapan calon di dalam format yang ditetapkan.

Calon boleh menggunakan 2 jam berikutnya untuk menyelesaikan

isu-isu capaian talian (sekiranya ada), dan memuatnaik jawapan ke
SPECTRUM dan emel kepada pentadbiranlib2011@gmail.com

Calon boleh merujuk buku, artikel, nota dan slaid tetapi calon tidak
dibenarkan menyalin perkataan demi perkataan dari buku, artikel
nota dan slaid.

Peperiksaan adalah pada hari Isnin 27 September 2021, bermula

jam 12 tengah hari sehingga 8 malam.

Calon mesti memuatnaik dan emel jawapan sebelum jam 8 malam,

27 September 2021.

(Kertas soalan ini mengandungi 6 soalan di dalam 3 halaman bercetak)

 LIB2011

1. ‘For myself, I believe that our view on the powers of the court in Judicial Review
proceedings, although they constitute a departure from previous cases decided in
this country to which I have referred, is a progressive one…’
Per Edgar Joseph Jr FCJ dalam R Rama Chandran v The Industrial Court of
Malaysia [1997] 1 MLJ 145, 239

Dengan merujuk kepada pernyataan di atas dan keputusan kes-kes yang relevan,
bincangkan perkembangan yang dibuat oleh Mahkamah Persekutuan dalam kes
yang dinyatakan di atas kepada permohonan semakan kehakiman di Malaysia. Pada
pendapat anda, haruskah pendekatan yang diambil oleh Mahkamah Persekutuan itu
dipakai dalam setiap permohonan semakan kehakiman di negara kita? Mengapa?
(20 markah)

2. Bincangkan kepentingan keputusan kehakiman dalam kes-kes yang berikut

kepada Undang-undang Pentadbiran di Malaysia:

a. Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng [1977] 2 MLJ 152

b. Syarikat Kenderaan Melayu Kelantan Bhd v Transport Workers’ Union
[1995] 2 MLJ 336
c. Abdul Ghani Haroon v Ketua Polis Negara [2001] 3 AMR 2572
d. Malaysian Trade Union Congress v Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi
[2014] 3 MLJ 145
(20 markah)

3. ‘It would be a grave lacuna in our system of public law if a pressure group or even
a public-spirited taxpayer, were prevented by outdated technical rules of locus standi
from bringing the matter to the attention of the court to vindicate the rule of law and
get unlawful action stopped’.
Per Lord Diplock dalam Inland Revenue Commissioners v National Federation of
Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd. [1981] 2 All ER 93, 107

Dengan merujuk kepada pernyataan di atas dan kes-kes yang relevan, bincangkan
kepentingan litigasi berkepentingan awam di Malaysia. Pada pendapat anda, apakah
perubahan ke atas sistem undang-undang yang harus dilakukan untuk
memperkembangkan litigasi berkepentingan awam di negara kita?
(20 markah)

4. Salah satu komponen keadilan asasi ialah nemo judex in causa sua atau kaedah
menentang berat sebelah.
Dengan merujuk kepada kes-kes yang telah diputuskan, bincangkan jenis-jenis berat
sebelah (bias) dan pengecualian-pengecualian am kepada kaedah ini.
(20 markah)

2/3
 LIB2011

5. Baru-baru ini, Maju Jaya Sdn Bhd telah membina sebuah kilang di Sungai Petani,
Kedah. Kerajaan negeri Kedah kemudiannya meluluskan permohonan Maju Jaya
Sdn Bhd untuk membuang sisa-sisa racun ke dalam sungai yang mengalir
dibelakang kilang tersebut. Dengan adanya kelulusan ini, kilang Maju Jaya Sdn Bhd
telah mula membuang sisa-sisa racun dalam kuantiti yang besar ke dalam sungai
tersebut. Clean Environment for All, sebuah badan bukan kerajaan yang bergiat
dalam isu-isu pemeliharaan alam sekitar, marah dengan tindakan-tindakan Maju
Jaya Sdn Bhd. Siva, Kien dan Chan merupakan penduduk yang tinggal berhampiran
dengan sungai tersebut dan menggunakan air sungai untuk mengairi kebun-kebun
mereka dan juga untuk diminum.
Saravanan, yang merupakan pengerusi Clean Environment for All, Siva, Kien dan
Chan telah datang berjumpa dengan anda. Nasihati mereka sama ada mereka akan
berjaya membawa suatu permohonan semakan kehakiman ke mahkamah.
Adakah jawapan anda akan berbeza jika kelulusan itu diberikan oleh kerajaan negeri
dua tahun yang lepas dan perundangan yang memberikan kuasa kepada kerajaan
negeri untuk meluluskan permohonan itu mengandungi suatu fasal penyingkiran
mahkamah?
(20 markah)

6. Dengan merujuk kepada kes-kes yang relevan, bincangkan bagaimana keadaan-

keadaan yang berikut akan membatalkan perlaksanaan kuasa budi bicara:
a. Tujuan yang tidak berpatutan;
b. Pertimbangan relevan diketepikan / pertimbangan tidak relevan diambil kira;
c. Bertindak bawah arahan; dan
d. Membelenggui budi bicara.
(20 markah)

TAMAT

3/3
UNIVERSITI MALAYA

EXAMINATION FOR
THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF JURISPRUDENCE

ACADEMIC SESSION 2020/2021

LIB 2011: Administrative Law

September 2021 Time: 8 hours

INSTRUCTION TO CANDIDATES:

Answer THREE (3) questions only.

This is strictly an 8 hour examination.

Candidates are required to use the first 6 hours to complete their

answers in the required format.

Candidates are to use the remaining 2 hours to resolve connectivity

issues (if any), and to upload their answers to SPECTRUM and email to
pentadbiranlib2011@gmail.com

You may refer to books, articles, notes and slides but you are not
permitted to copy word for word from the books, articles, notes and
slides.

The examination is on Friday, 27 September from 12 noon to 8pm.

Candidates must upload and email their answers before 8pm on 27

September 2021.

(This question paper consists of 6 questions on 3 printed pages)

 LIB2011

1. ‘For myself, I believe that our view on the powers of the court in Judicial Review
proceedings, although they constitute a departure from previous cases decided in
this country to which I have referred, is a progressive one…’
Per Edgar Joseph Jr FCJ in R Rama Chandran v The Industrial Court of Malaysia
[1997] 1 MLJ 145, 239

With reference to the above statement and relevant decided cases, discuss the
developments made by the Federal Court in the above mentioned case to judicial
review application in Malaysia. In your opinion, should the approach taken by the
Federal Court be applied to every judicial review application in our country? Why?
(20 marks)

2. Discuss the importance of the judicial decision in the following cases to

Administrative Law in Malaysia:
a. Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng [1977] 2 MLJ 152
b. Syarikat Kenderaan Melayu Kelantan Bhd v Transport Workers’ Union
[1995] 2 MLJ 336
c. Abdul Ghani Haroon v Ketua Polis Negara [2001] 3 AMR 2572
d. Malaysian Trade Union Congress v Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi
[2014] 3 MLJ 145
(20 marks)

3. ‘It would be a grave lacuna in our system of public law if a pressure group or even
a public-spirited taxpayer, were prevented by outdated technical rules of locus standi
from bringing the matter to the attention of the court to vindicate the rule of law and
get unlawful action stopped’.
Per Lord Diplock in Inland Revenue Commissioners v National Federation of Self-
Employed and Small Businesses Ltd. [1981] 2 All ER 93, 107

With reference to the above statement and to relevant case laws, discuss the
importance of public interest litigation in Malaysia. In your opinion, what reform to the
legal system should be made in order to develop public interest litigation in our
country?
(20 marks)

4. One of the components of natural justice is nemo judex in causa sua or the rule
against bias.
With reference to decided cases, discuss the various types of bias and the general
exceptions to the rule.

(20 marks)

5. Maju Jaya Sdn Bhd has recently set up a new factory in Sungai Petani, Kedah.
The Kedah state government then approved an application made by Maju Jaya Sdn

2/3
 LIB2011

Bhd to discharge toxic waste into the river flowing behind their factory. With this
approval, Maju Jaya Sdn Bhd’s factory began to throw large amount of toxic waste
into the river. Clean Environment for All, a non-governmental organization dedicated
to environmental protection issues, is outraged by Maju Jaya Sdn Bhd’s actions.
Siva, Kien and Chan are villagers who live near the river and use water from the river
to irrigate their farms and also for drinking.
Saravanan, who is the chairman of Clean Environment for All, Siva, Kien and Chan
came to see you. Advise them whether they will be successful in bringing an
application for judicial review to the court.
Would your answer be different if the approval was given by the state government
two years ago and that the legislation conferring power to the state government to
approve such applications contains an ouster clause?
(20 marks)

6. With reference to relevant cases, discuss how the following instances vitiate an
exercise of discretionary power:
a. Improper purpose;
b. Setting aside relevant considerations / taking into account irrelevant
considerations;
c. Acting under dictation; and
d. Fettering discretion.
(20 marks)

END

3/3