Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
BAANU MOHAN – Appellant
Versus
AIA BERHAD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. preliminary issue on contract validity. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. clause restricts spouse's employment illegally. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. restriction on spouse violates s 28 contracts act. (Para 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. defendant claims clause is valid under specific circumstances. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. clause restraining spouse's employment is void. (Para 11) |
| 6. trial to proceed on remaining issues. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
(Preliminary Issue Before Trial)
A. Introduction
[1] This is the decision of this Court on the issue of law that appears in the pleaded case of the parties that should be determined before this matter proceeds to be heard at trial on 8 December 2025 to 10 December 2025.
[2] I have exercised the powers reposed in O 33 r 2 of the Rules of Court 2012. I believe the first issue that must be determined is whether the clause relied on by the Defendant is valid in law and whether it is contrary to ss 28 and 24 of the Contracts Act 1950 .
B. Decision Of Court
[3] The clause that is in question that allegedly appears in the Agency Compensation Handbook Version 7.4 and forms part of the Contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, is as follows:
"2.2.6. In the e
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
