DISCUSSION English Law

Topics: Kuala Lumpur, Company, English law Pages: 1 (219 words) Published: December 3, 2014
DISCUSSION – ENGLISH LAW (Kes Jaclyn & Mr Victor) – PROBLEMATIC QUESTION

1 – IDENTIFY ISSUE
-

Whether Jaclyn can refer to the English Company Law to solve Mr. Victor’s problem.

2 – APPLY THE PRINCIPAL OF LAW
Conditional Application of English Law:
a) ABSENCE OF LOCAL STATUTES – briefly explain.
 Our current law are not fully implies to handle the cases in court. So we can refer to English Law as reference.
Outline Case Authorities
 Rujuk Kes: Jamil Harun V Yang Kamsiah And Anor
: Karpal Singh V PP

Apply to Current Case
 In this case, we can use Companies Act 1965 (Malaysia own statutes of Company Law)

b) SUITABLE TO THE LOCAL INHABITANT – briefly explain.
 If nak import / guna undang-undang luar, kena buat modification so it can meet requirement local inhabitant agar boleh beri keadilan kepada penduduk tempatan Outline Case Authorities
o Proviso to Section 3(1) Civil Law Act
o Case: Chou Choon Neoh V Spottiswoode

Apply to Current Case
 If Jaclyn wants to apply English Law, secara persuasive only, must be suitable to local inhabitants to the company minority issue.
c) CUT OF DATE
If Jaclyn wants to apply English Law, she must observe the date. Since Company tersebut berada di Kuala Lumpur, must refer to Section 3(1) (a) – 7 April 1956 for Peninsular Malaysia.
3 – CONCLUSION
English Law always subject to the 3 Condition of Law as above.

MLS/Gha2014

Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • English Law Report Research Paper
  • Sources Of English Law Essay
  • English Case Law on Piercing the Corporate Veil Essay
  • effect of section 6 of the Civil Law Ac Essay
  • Refining, Confining and Distinguishing Old Laws in English Legal System Essay
  • Sources of Law Essay
  • Civil Law vs Common Law Essay
  • Common Law Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free