HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ARUNAMARI PLANTATIONS SDN BHD & ORS – Appellant
Versus
LEMBAGA MINYAK SAWIT MALAYSIA & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's challenge to the cess order 2007. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. issues surrounding the constitutionality of the cess order. (Para 4) |
| 3. defendants' arguments against the challenge. (Para 5) |
| 4. court's interpretation of statutory provisions. (Para 6 , 8 , 14) |
| 5. discussion on the legality of exemptions under the cess order. (Para 9 , 12) |
| 6. possibility of a refund if cess collection deemed unconstitutional. (Para 15 , 16) |
[1] Enclosure 1 was heard on 4 February 2010 and continued on 1 March 2010, and after hearing extensive and interesting arguments on the points of law canvassed by respective counsel, I reserved my decision to 31 March 2010 wherein I granted an order in terms of prayers (h) only of encl 1, and I append below my reasons for so doing.
[2] From a gleaning of the various prayers of encl 1, it can be observed, that the plaintiff has mounted an attack on the Malaysian Palm Oil Board Act 1998 and the regulations made there under (the said Act) on the grounds it violates several provisions of the Federal Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional and/or ultra vires and are praying for certain provisions of the said Act and orders m
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.