Author

Kherk Ying Chew

Browsing

Introduction In a recent decision, Heineken Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v Super La Via Sdn Bhd [1](Heineken) the Malaysian High Court held that a party accused of trademark infringement could not rely on being a mere middleman just facilitating the importation of counterfeit goods to be sold by another party to a non-Malaysian market to avoid liability. The assertion of non-ownership of the said goods is not a statutory defence under the Malaysian Trade Marks…

Introduction The law has always recognized the laissez-faire principle of the freedom of contract and as such, Malaysian Courts have been willing to uphold exclusion clauses when such clauses are clearly drafted. In the recent landmark decision of CIMB Bank Bhd v Anthony Lawrence Bourke & Anor [2019] 2 MLJ 1, the Malaysian Federal Court held that where such exclusion clauses are drafted in a manner which effectively limits a party from enforcing their rights…

On November 21, 2018, the Malaysian Federal Court overturned a well-established decision on the effectiveness and enforceability of liquidated damages clauses in contracts.[1] Before this decision, the previous position had left many questioning the effectiveness of incorporating a liquidated damages clauses in their contracts. BACKGROUND The fundamental purpose of a liquidated damages clause is to enable the parties to negotiate and agree in their contract on the compensation payable for non-performance of contractual obligations. Section…