-In$ur@nce-

Lately, airports are the home for travellers due to the unexpected Iceland Volcano Eruption. Airports around Europe are forced to shut down their operations, causing many airlines to cancel most flights to Europe. Assuming that I have purchased a travel insurance, the questions are:


First, what if my flight has been cancelled, can I claim the premium of travel insurance?
I can only refund the premium if I bought the travel insurance before the eruption and if my flight is cancelled due to this Iceland volcano eruption.

Second, what if my flight is delay to next week, can I refund the premium of travel insurance?
Yes, I may refund the premium. However, the travel insurance will automatically extend to 30 days from the expiry date due to delay or interruption of public transport. Thus, if I did not claim for the premium, I am still insured under the travel insurance which I bought.

- Tax@t!0n -

Wanna escape from paying so much tax ? Not a problem, here is a list of personal reliefs.

a) Medical expenses for parents
b) Medical expenses for severe disease such as AIDS, cancer and so on.
c) Medical examination but limited to RM500.
d) Disabled individual, wife/husband, children
e) Wife
f) Purchase of equipment for disabled people
g) Education fees in the field of industrial, scientific, technology, technical, accounting, law and Islamic finance.
h) Purchase of books, journals, magazines and publications
i) Purchase of personal computer
j) EPF and life insurance premium
k) Education and medical insurance
l) EPF annuity insurance

-Uberr!m@ Fide$-

Uberrima fides, a Latin phrase which mean utmost good faith. The doctrine of utmost good faith under insurance law is a principle stating that all parties entering into an insurance contract must disclose all material facts honestly as these information might affect their decision to enter into the contract. Under insurance contract, the insured and insurer must act in good faith. If the insured fail to disclose certain facts, the insurer has the right to not compensate the insured.

Obama to Sign Health Care Bill into Law

Link to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u5x5PCOGmk&feature=related

On 23 March 2010, President Obama signed health care bill into law. House of Representatives passed the bill that will bring near-universal coverage to a wealthy country in which tens of millions of people are uninsured. This bill will expand health care coverage for about 95 percent of eligible Americans from 83 percent. Obama said:" We are not a nation that scales back its aspirations. We are not a nation that falls prey to doubt or mistrust....Here in this nation, we shape our own destiny."

However, Republicans across country are challenging the mandate in health care bill which requires all Americans to have health insurance, charging that it is unconstitutional. Republican governor of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty claimed the mandate as "an unprecedented overreach by federal government forcing citizens to purchase a good or service for no reason then they happen to be alive or a person." Pawlenty also said "They've taken it to this big, federalized, bureaucratic, kind of nanny nation approach."

So, should the health care bill be signed into law ? which in turn requiring each individuals to buy health insurance. Well, if this mandate is beneficial to all Americans, why not? But one fact is we do not know whether does everyone in America is willing to buy the health insurance.

Sources from FOX news and abc news.

-Def!n3-

Caveat Emptor



In Latin, it means Buyer Beware ! Asking the buyers to pay attention to the goods they are going to purchase. Sellers do not carry full responsibilities for any faulty transactions. As the consumers, we also holds the responsibility to make sure the to-be-purchased goods are in good conditions. The doctrine of Caveat Emptor implies that buyers could not later hold the seller responsible for the defected goods they bought. According to Answers.com, Caveat Emptor was first laid down by Chief Justice- John Marshall in 1817 as a principle in United States law. Laidlaw versus Organ was the first case that adopted Caveat Emptor, it regards to the purchase of tobacco.



Caveat Venditor



Contrary to Caveat Emptor, it means Seller Beware ! Sellers must be aware of buyers as they might also be tricked by buyers to enter into transactions. Under the doctrine of Caveat Venditor, seller holds the responsibility for defected goods thus it prevents seller from selling poor quality goods. MacPherson versus Buick Motor Co., a case regarding the purchase of automobile in 1916 held Buick Motor liable for MacPherson's injury due to the collapse of a defective wheel.

-C@se -

Lee versus Lee's Air Farming Ltd


It is one of the cases where the veil of incorporation principle applied. Other cases include Salomon versus Salomon & Co. Ltd and Macaura versus Northern Insurance Co.


Some FACTS about the case
Mr Lee formed and owned his company -Lee's Air Farming Ltd. Besides being the sole director for the company, he also worked as chief pilot. Unfortunately, he was killed in plane crash. His wife wanted a compensation from Workers' Compensation Act 1922, however under this Act, Mr Lee has to be an employee in order to get the claim. The legal issue here is whether the company Mr Lee owned is a separate legal entity which will decide whether Mrs Lee can claim for the compensation.

It was held that the company is a separate legal entity and Mr Lee can be an employee for the company he owned thus Lee's Air Farming Ltd. was liable to pay Mrs Lee the compensation.

-Ex@mpL3-

Holding and Subsidiary Company


Holding company and subsidiary company are two separate legal entities. Section 5 of Companies Act 1965 stated that "The first mentioned corporation is a subsidiary of any corporation which is that other corporation's subsidiary."

A company is a subsidiary of that parent company if the parent company:
a) controls the compositions of the borad of directors of the first mentioned company.
b) controls more than half of the voting power of the first mentioned corporation.
c) holds more then half of the issued share capital of the first mentioned corporation.

Example 1:

Maxis Communications Sdn Bhd (Parent) and its subsidiaries including UMTS, Maxis Mobile Sdn Bhd, Maxis Multimedia Sdn Bhd and Maxis Broadband Sdn Bhd. Based on Maxis's 2003 annual report, UMTS (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Maxis , is awarded the 3G Spectrum Assignment by Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission for the provision of 3G services. In May 2003, Maxis completes its acquisition against Malaysian Mobile Services Sdn. Bhd which formerly known as TIMECel Sdn. Bhd.

Example 2:

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (Parent) is a diversified company that involved in the business of financial services, insurance, jewelry, air services, furniture and many more. It has more than 50 subsidiaries. One example is NetJets. Inc, evidence shown in its official website: http://www.netjets.com/default.asp



Click this link to view the list of its subsidiaries : http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/subs/sublinks.html

-Revi$i0n-

EXAM ALERT


This coming Thursday will be the business law exam !! Now , let's start revising...

What is LAW ?
Basically, it is sets of uniform rules or principles. When it links to our community, it will be defined as a set of principles which govern and regulate human behaviour.

Why LAW ?
Law is essential to preserve order in the society, to solve disputes among individuals and most importantly, it serves as a guideline which must be widely acceptable so that people will obey.

Law & Government
In Malaysia, law can be divided into public law and civil (private) law. Our government consists of Judiciary, Legislature and Executive.

Malaysian Legal System
Structure of this sytem is formed by unwritten sources and written sources.
Under unwritten sources, there are:

* Customary law
* Islamic law - is only applicable to Muslims and Shariah Court is in charge of any issues related to Islam.
* English common law - with the rules of equity are applicable to Malaysia based on Section 3(1) of Civil Law Act 1956
* Case law - judicial decision

Under written sources, there are:

* Constitution - the supreme source of Malaysian law. It grants powers to the Federal and State Government as well as fundamental rights to citizens.
* Legislation - enacted by Federal Parliament or the State Legislative Assemblies. and must pass through proper legislative processes.
* Subsidiary Legislation - enacted by Executives under a mandate of the parent act.

-Eli9!bLe-

Generally, everyone of us is eligible for entering into a contract. “Every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to which he is subject, and who is of sound mind and is not disqualified from contracting by any law to which he is subject.” However, three categories of people do not have the legal capacity to contracts based on Section 11 of Contracts Act. They are :


1) Minor
According to the Age of Majority Act, 18 years old is the age of majority in Malaysia. Thus anyone who is aged below 18 do not have the legal capacity to enter into a contract.

2) Of unsound mind
Examples are insanity, madness, mental problems, schizophrenia, epilepsy, intoxication, drunken, unconscious either permanently or intermittently. These person cannot act rationally and think logically therefore they are ineligible to be involved in a contract.

3) Specifically barred by law
Persons who are being limited under bankruptcy law, political law and law of war against enemy citizens. For instance, Company A is suffering financial distress. Few days later, Company A declares to be barred under the bankruptcy law and in consequence its business operations got disrupted. In the end, they had to withdraw its engagement in the business contract with company K.

-Br@!nSt0rM-

Today while I was reading the newspaper, I saw one brochure inserted inside. It is Domino's pizza brochure attached with coupons. Buy 1 free 1 written on the coupon with terms and conditons. Hmm, I started to wonder is coupon an invitation to treat or an offer and acceptance? The example below demonstrated my opinion:

Scenario
After I read through the brochure, I tear out the coupon and keep it. I plan to present it and claim for free pizza during my next visit to Domino's pizza. Just two weeks before the coupon expires, I went to Domino's and used it to get a free pizza for purchasing one pizza.

This coupon is actually an unilateral offer by Domino's. Unilateral offer defines as offer made to anyone, like in the Carlil and Carbolic Smoke Ball Company case. Accordint to Section 2(a) of the Contracts Act, Domino's was making an offer to whoever that has the willingness to visit their store to purchase pizza, can use this coupon to redeem for a free pizza. Based on the scenario described above, I have the intention to buy a pizza and claim for my free pizza using the coupon as I tear it out and kept it. From Section 2(b) of the Contracts Act, I can be said that I had accepted the offer as I presented the coupon while buying to get my free pizza. I also fulfilled the terms and conditions, one example is I used the coupon before it expires. Here, transaction is made thus also implies that Offer and Acceptance had take place.

What if after i read through the brochure, I just left the coupon as it is which means that i do not have the intention to use the coupon for any discounts on pizzas. Can I say that the coupon is an invitation to treat as I do not keep it or use it to buy pizza.

The answer is no. By definition, invitation to treat is not an offer but an invitation to make an offer. This case is similar to Carlil versus Carbolic case whereby Domino's promised a free pizza for anyone who presented the coupon when purchasing a pizza, with terms and conditions fulfilled. Since the well known case had distinguished offer from invitation to treat, I would like to conclude that coupon is not an invitation to treat. Consideration is involved in this case too. Maybe I will buy a pizza without using the coupon or perhaps I am not interested in Domino's but favor Pizza Hut.

-D!sTinguiSh-

DIFFRENCES BETWEEN FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION


Based on Section 17 of Contract Act, Fraud refers to certain acts which is intended to deceive another party or to induce him/her to enter into contract.

Fraud
- With an intention to deceive other party thus is a willful wrong.
- The person making the false statement but ownselves does not believe in it.
- The aggrieved party can sue the accused to claim damages.
- The aggrieved party can file a lawsuit to set aside the contract anytime. Hence,
fraudulent contract will never be a valid contract.
- A high standard of proof is required to set aside the contract.

Section 18 defines Misrepresentation as false statement made by one party which induces the other to enter into a contract, but the person who made such presentation thought it was true.

Misrepresentation
- Without any intention to deceive others thus is an innocent wrong.
- The person believes that the false statement is true. A result of being ignorant or
getting wrong information.
- The aggrieved party does not has the right to claim damages.
- The aggrieved party has to file a lawsuit within the specified time to set aside the
contract. If not, the contract is then a valid contract.
- Lower standard of proof is required to set aside the contract.

-CL@r!ty-

DISCHARGE OF CONTRACTS

A contract is said to be discharged under these 3 situations:

a) Discharge by performance -If the parties perform their respective promises in accordance with the terms of the agreement, then it is said that the contract has been discharged by performance.
Example: Cirus Consulting Firm engaged itself in a contract with Woot Company last year for the duration of one year. Under the terms of agreement, Cirus need to consult Woot on their business operations, business strategy and distribution process. In fact, Cirus did carried out their tasks as promised for the past one year. The contract is hence terminated.

b) Discharge by frustration -A contract is frustrated if the contract legally or physically becomes impossible to perform for subsequent change of circumstances.
Example: Superstar 'Rain' concert will be held in Bukit Jalil Stadium on 1st of April. Unfortunately, the concert has to be cancelled as Malaysian government announced on 28, March that they had to shut down all operations of airports until H1N1 is in control.

c) Discharge by Breach of contract -If one of the parties in a contract refuses to perform his promise it is said that the contract has been discharged by breach.
Example: Amber agrees to sell her car to Max for RM 55,000. However, she refuses to sell the car after one week. Thus, Amber has breached the contract.

-UnderSt@nd!n9-

Invitation to Treat

Example 1:
One day, Jake and his friends went to Sunway Pyramid shopping centre for movie. While they are walking, Jake came across a shop where he is attracted by this wooden guitar hanging in front of the shop window. So, he decided to went in the shop and he saw a price tag placed beside the wooden guitar. In the end, he did not buy it as he cannot afford the price. After that, Jake meet up with his friends at cinema for the show.

Jake intended to buy the guitar at first but once he saw the price tag, he felt the price is not reasonable thus he left empty handed. As Jake walked off the shop without the guitar, he did not offer to buy it based on Section 2(a) of Contracts Act 1950. Case of Fisher versus Bell mentioned that display of any goods with a price tag is just an invitation to treat but not an offer.


Example 2:
Blair is a fresh graduate and she wants to work as an accountant as she holds the degree for Bachelor of Accounting. In the mean time, she is searching for jobs advertised on newspapers. She highlighted those posts that she is interested in. Finally, Blair decided to apply few companies for the post of accountant as she wants to increase her job opportunity. Without any hesitation, she sent her resume to those companies.


According to the case of Mazumder v. A.G. of Sarawak, it stated that advertisement on newspapers with job posts is merely an invitation to treat. Furthermore, though Blair can be regarded as making an offer since she had sent her resume, but she still need to wait for the reply. In other words, those companies can either reject or accept her application.

-Sh@me-

Dog towed by motorcyclist



A photo of a motorcyclist towing a chained dog that was uploaded to the Internet has sparked off public outrage in China.The photo, put up by a netizen surnamed Liu on Thursday, showed a man riding on a motorcycle on a highway in Fuzhou.

And a dog, which has a metal chain coiled around its neck, was being dragged along the road by the motorcyclist."I wound down my car window and asked the man to stop. However, he sped up and zoomed away," Liu told the Straits Newspaper, a metropolitan daily paper in the capital of China's Fujian province.

"The dog couldn't bark due to the chains around its neck, and its four legs were bleeding," Liu said. "The motorcyclist was riding at about 50 km per hour at the time."
Some netizens left messages at Tianya.cn - a popular online bulletin board - to rebuke the man's brutality. Some doubted that the man was a dog thief. Other furious netizens demanded a search for the man.- China Daily


Animal Ordinance Act 1953 is the law that governs animal abuse cases. The fine for abusing any animals is ranged from RM100 to RM200 only. Surprisingly, the punishment was rather lenient and many believed that it would not teach the wrong-doers a lesson. Under the Act, there is a jail sentence of 6 months however, it has never been used before. In Malaysia, SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) is a non-profit organization which takes care of defenseless animals. "SPCA has came up with a petition and is appealing the court to raise the maximum fine of RM200 to RM100,000." [Quoted from Wikipedia] More and more articles about abandoned, abused animals are being published nowadays and this reflects the increasing number of animal abuse cases. Our government should enforced the Law of Animal Ordinance Act 1953 at once. Say NO to Animal Cruelty !!!

-@rt!cLe-

Girl, 16, buried alive for talking to boys

In a gruesome incident of honour killing, a 16-year-old Turkish girl was buried alive by relatives for talking to boys. Medine Memi was found in a sitting position with her hands tied, in a two-metre hole dug under a chicken pen outside her home in Kahta, according Turkish newspaper Hurriyet. Police made the discovery in December after a tip-off from an informant, who told the police she had been killed following a family "council" meeting.
A post mortem examination revealed large amounts of soil in her lungs and stomach, indicating that she had been alive and conscious while being buried. Her body showed no signs of bruising.
The girl had previously been reported missing. Her father and grandfather have since been arrested and held in custody pending trial. The girl’s mother was arrested, but was released later.
Media reports said the father had told relatives he was unhappy that his daughter, who was one of nine children, had male friends. The grandfather is said to have beaten her for having relations with the opposite sex.
Apparently Medine had repeatedly tried to report to police that she had been beaten by her father and grandfather days before she was killed.
"She tried to take refuge at the police station three times, and she was sent home three times," her mother, Immihan, said after the body was discovered in December.
The episode is set to reopen the debate about honour killings in Turkey. Although honour killings are not infrequent in Turkey, the especially gruesome manner of Medine's death has shocked the nation.
Official figures have indicated that more than 200 such killings take place each year, accounting for around half of all murders in Turkey.

Cited from: http://www.dailychilli.com/news/2238-girl-16-buried-alive-for-talking-to-boys

Honour killing also known as customary killing, is the murder of a family member by other family members, where the murderers (and potentially the wider community) believe that the victim have brought dishonor upon the family or community. Human Right Watch defines "honour killings" as acts of violence, usually murder, committed by male family members against female family members, who are held to have brought dishonor upon the family. A woman can be targeted by her family members for various reasons which include refuse to enter into an arranged marriage, being the victim of a sexual assault, seeking a divorce even from an abusive husband. -Quoted from Wikipedia-

The Medine case mentioned above occured in Turkey- one of the countries where honor killing is illegal yet common to occur. Based on Turkish Criminal Code, the person will be sentenced to life in prison if found guilty of this crime. One recent case was on January 13 last year, where five Kurdish family members are sentenced to life imprisonment for the honour killing of Naile Erdas, 16, who got pregnant after being raped. Cases of honour killing are indeed more likely to arise in rural areas due to lack of attention from authorities as well as they fell behind in terms of education, legislation and so forth. Souad, a woman who survived from a failed honour killing has published her first book "Burned Alive: A Victim of the Law of Men". This book is gaining momentum from human rights groups globally as now men and women are no longer unequal. Hence, raising awareness towards this issue is of utmost importance.

-Tut0r!aL-

Chong and Wei went shopping and decided to shop at Super Supermarket. Wei looked at the goods which were on display and decided to purchase 3 face cream which were on offer. She took the bottles to counter where she paid for them. As they were leaving the supermarket, the cashier came up to them and told them that they have to return the goods. Advise Wei according to Contracts Act 1950 and relevant decided cases.

The issue regarding Wei case was whether a legally binding agreement exists between Wei with the cashier of Super Supermarket and whether Wei should return the goods. A legally binding agreement exists if there is offer and acceptance. Goods on display looked by Wei is just an invitation to treat but not an offer. Cases regarding display of goods in shops are Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemist and Fisher v. Bell. Any goods with a price tag displayed in a shop was merely an invitation to treat, stated in Fisher versus Bell case.

According to Section 2(a) of the Contracts Act, “When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to the act or abstinence, he is said to make an OFFER.” Thus, it means Wei offer to buy the 3 face creams when she took them to the counter. The known Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd. case where Carbolic Smoke Ball would offer 1000 pound to anyone who took their medicine as prescribed for a certain period but found the medicine ineffective. ACCEPTANCE is when the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted: a proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise based on Section 2 (b) of the Contract Act. The sale is said to take place at counter when the cashier accepted the price paid by Wei. Hence, there is a binding contract between Wei and the cashier as Wei offer to buy the products and the cashier accepted her payment.

Under Section 4(2), Contracts Act, the communication of acceptance is complete when a) it is put in a course of transmission to the proposer, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor or b) it comes to the knowledge of the proposer, as against the acceptor. Section 5 of Contracts Act 1950 stated that “An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor or the proposer, but not afterwards.” Case of Byrne v. Van Tienhoven can be refered where the revocation of offer by defendant was not effective as the plaintiff received the revocation letter only after the communication of acceptance is completed. In this case, the cashier has violated the Contract Act by asking Wei to return the goods hence, Wei has the right to not return the goods. However, if the cashier insist Wei to return the goods then Wei can file a lawsuit against the cashier.

-@Rt!Cle-

Japan whalers' new foe: Scientists
No-kill expedition sets out to challenge hunts


WELLINGTON, New Zealand - Researchers are en route to study whales off Antarctica without killing them -an open challenge to Japan's killing of up to 1,000 whales a year in the name of science.

Japan has a six-boat whaling fleet in Antarctic waters as part of its scientific whaling program, an allowed exception to the International Whaling Commission's 1986 ban on commercial whaling. Opponents claim Japan's program is commercial whaling in disguise, with the whale meat sold for food in Japan.






Australian government crew photographed this dead minke whale and her calf being hauled aboard a Japanese whaler in February 2008. Australia is considering a lawsuit against the hunts.

Some 18 scientists from Australia, France and New Zealand are taking part in the initial six-week voyage to research whales, their food and their interaction with the environment.

Source taken from : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35198535/ns/world_news-world_environment/

Eight whales species are listed as endangered animal under the protection of Endangered Species Act which include blue whale, bowhead whale, fin whale, gray whale, sperm whale, bottlenose whale, minke whale and bryde whale. The future of whales now depends on Japan's decision whether to cease or continue whale hunting. According to Webecoist.com, Japanese whaling fleet claims to slaughter whales in the name of research, yet not a single study has been published ever since their hunting. Besides hundreds of minke whales, they slaughter few dozens of fin whales annually too, at the end turned out to be cans on store shelves. Article VIII of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) stated that member nations can kill as many whales as they need for scientific research purposes. However, opponents argued that Japan is exploiting IWC's rule to sustain its whaling industry thus Australia government is considering to file a lawsuit against Japan's hunt based on the article. If Australia takes legal action towards Japan, the lawsuit will be carried into international court to resolve whether Japan was using scientific research as smokescreen to escape the international ban on commercial whale-catching.

(images via Biotechonology Learning Hub)

-@Rt!cLe-

Driver watching porn when he rammed into car


BUFFALO (New York): State police say a truck driver was watching pornographic movies on his laptop computer when his rig struck a disabled car on the New York State Thruway near Buffalo last month, killing the driver.

Thomas Wallace of Ohio was arrested Tuesday. He’s been charged with second-degree manslaughter in the death of 33-year-old Julie Stratton, a mother of two from a Buffalo suburb.

The 45-year-old Wallace was being held in Genesee County Jail on Wednesday. It was unknown whether he had an attorney. Investigators say Wallace also violated federal trucking rules by sleeping no more than four of 27 hours before the crash.

Source cited from this website: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/1/28/nation/20100128094359&sec=nation

This news above is somehow similar to the Ryan case where he hit a pedestrian due to distraction from using mobile phone. Similarity of both cases is the pedestrian was injured because of driver negligence and in Wallace case, the death of a woman was caused by driver negligence too. However, Ryan and Wallace will received different charges. Obviously, Wallace will be held on a more serious charge than Ryan. The reason is that the pedestrian was injured but not killed whereas the woman was killed in the crash. From the article, it stated that Wallace had been arrested with a charge of second-degree manslaughter.

So, everyone please drive safely.
Think of your family & Think about others !

-Du@L!ty-

The Doctr!ne 0f StaRe Dec!siS


PROs

Often, it is said that the Doctrine of Stare Decisis, also known as Doctrine of Judicial Precedent provides greater legal certainty. Think this way, our common law is backed by a considerable amount of case laws which in turn means that the probable outcome for cases is already provided. Since the problem already has a solution, therefore it is convenient to judges as it saves their effort and time to consider the facts then process the case before reaching a conclusion. Justice in law is of major importance thus fairness can be ensured under this system as similar cases are treated in the same way by refering to previous cases. Furthermore, any misjudgements can be avoided if past cases are used as guidance. As an important source of law, the Doctrine promotes the development of law where new laws are easily formed through the modification of existing laws.


CONs

Though legal certainty is led by the strong foundation underlying our laws, complexity and confusion will also arise parallelly due to the increasing amount of case laws which will caused difficulties in searching for relevant cases. Some who do not support this system argued on the issue of flexibility in which judges are not able to make own judgements as they are abide by the Doctrine. Another saying will be the judge's discretion is limited by this precedent. Hence, there are criticisms that the judicial precedent indeed has lead to system rigidity. If mistakes have been made in past cases, the mistakes will be repeated by the judge that followed the past cases unless the mistakes are corrected when discovered. The development of law is restricted within the border of judicial precedent thus it is hard to create new laws with further scope beyond. However, new laws are needed in order to prevent injustice especially under our changing nature.

-Th!nK-

T!me to BrainSt0rm !!

Here is the first example:
When driving his car home in Georgetown, Ryan called and talked with his wife through his mobile phone without the use of hands-free device. While talking, he lost control over his car and eventually hit a walking pedestrian.

*Is Ryan liable under civil or criminal law?
*Should this case go to court, what will be Ryan’s right?
*What should the pedestrian do to recover his injuries or loss?

As Malaysians, we are clearly informed that it is against the traffic law to talk via mobile phone without the use of hands-free device as well as to drink and drive. Criminal law defines various offences such as murder, robbery, forgery, counterfeiting, theft, cheating, criminal breach of trust and causing grievous hurt committed by individual against the State. It aims to punish individuals who commit crime hence Ryan is liable under criminal law.

If this case go to the court, Ryan will automatically be charged with negligent driving due to violations of the traffic law as he got distracted by using mobile phone while driving and eventually hit a pedestrian. As a result, he might received a black record for his driving record or even his driving license may be suspended for a specified time length beside having to pay the victim a compensation.

The pedestrian can sue Ryan in order to be compensated for his injuries, damages or loss. So, he might need a lawyer for informations on his rights. The pedestrian definitely can claim for a compensation of medical expenses. If he is absent from work due to his injuries, he might be able to claim a compensation for that too. However, the compensation amount depends on many factors other than the driver's car speed and whether the victim has major or minor injuries.

The second example:
Geena runs an unregistered online investment portal from her home in KL where she managed to get people deposit money to her account. It was discovered that the investment was a scam and she attempted to flee with the money, only to be arrested in the airport by immigration officers because she held a fake passport.

*Determine Geena’s liability: civil or criminal?
*What law(s) and statutes you think Geena has violated?

I would say that Geena is liable for civil law, the disputes between private individuals as she is actually committing a financial fraud- gaining money illegally for personal use. According to Bank Negara Malaysia, fraud is a crime and is also a civil law violations. Being holding a fake passport, she has violated criminal law which defines as violations of any statutory crime by individuals against the State. Even worst, she may be charged with forgery.

Moreover, I think that Geena has violated Passport Act, Immigration Act and Registrar of Companies Malaysia under Companies Act 1965. I found one article titled "Department making headway in fake passport cases" which happened to support my view. The reference website is http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/7/27/nation/21935047&sec=nation

Under 12B of Passport Act, any person who makes any false document
a) intending it to be used by himself or by any other person;
b) that is used by himself or by any other person,
as a passport for the purposes of this Act shall be guilty and be liable to a fine of not less than RM 15,000 but not more than RM100,000. Also, imprisonment for a term of not less than two years but not more than ten years and with whipping of not more than six strokes of the rotan.

As for the Immigration Act, prohibited persons include a person who is not in the possession of valid travel document or is in the possession of forged document. Under Companies Act 1965, Registrar of Companies required all companies to register before conducting any business activity in Malaysia.

-Ori9inaL-

Hey guys,

I'm new to blogging...still on the progress of learning >.<

For the past few weeks, me together with other members have been helping out in the workshop and raising funds for the Cross Cultural Integration Program event.

It is tiring but we are happy to look at our completed drawings. They are to be displayed in our booth.

Here is our first drawing :

The second piece ~

That's all for my first post, hope u all enjoy !!