SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 17
1.  HaslindabteHamzah versus Kumon Method of Learning Centre   2. Telekom Malaysia Bhd versus Tribunal TuntutanPengguna & Anor NUR IDIENTEE BINTI ABD HALIM  (806092) ATHIRAH MOHD TAN 		   (806265) ROSLAN BIN RIDZUAN		   (806481)
HaslindabteHamzahversusKumon Method of Learning Centre  FACTS ,[object Object]
Court Of Appeal at Putrajaya. ( 2006 ).
The respondent ran a tuition centre and the appellant enroll three children in it.
Appellant found the service rendered by the respondent to be wanting and wanted a refund of the fee appellant had paid the respondent. ,[object Object]
The tribunal ordered the respondent to make a partial refund.
The respondent applied to the High Court for judicial review to quash the tribunal’s decision.
The judicial commissioner  quashed the tribunal’s award on the ground that it had not given written reasons for its award in accordance with s 114 of Consumer Protection Act 1999.
The appellant appealed.
Now the appellant use the own name and Tribunal just for support their claims.
Tribunal like the middleman to settle the appellant judge to respondent.
All the rules and regulation taken action in this case to settle with order from the judge.,[object Object]
Whether tribunal could order partial refund.
Whether awards should not be struck down save in the rarest of cases – Consumer Protection Act 1999 s 114.,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]
Tribunal has been conferred with extraordinary powers to do speedy justice for customers. Its awards should not be struck down save in the rarest of cases. Where it has misinterpreted some provision of the Act in such a way to produce an injustice. Court should be ever remindful that certiorari is not a remedy that is available as of right. It is not every error of law committed by an inferior tribunal that entitles the High Court to issues certiorari.
The High Courts do not, and should not, act as courts of appeal under art 226.
The appellant win in this case because more their evidence and support by the Tribunal and Consumer Protection Act 1999.

More Related Content

What's hot

Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950Intan Muhammad
 
Private Caveat
Private CaveatPrivate Caveat
Private Caveata_sophi
 
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes Only
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes OnlyLand Law II notes - For Revision Purposes Only
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes OnlyAzrin Hafiz
 
Security dealings charge
Security dealings   chargeSecurity dealings   charge
Security dealings chargeHafizul Mukhlis
 
Zainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutor
Zainur Zakaria v Public ProsecutorZainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutor
Zainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutorsurrenderyourthrone
 
definition of land / Law of fixture
definition of land / Law of fixturedefinition of land / Law of fixture
definition of land / Law of fixtureIntan Muhammad
 
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)Husna Rodzi
 
Lien and lien holder's caveat
Lien and lien holder's caveatLien and lien holder's caveat
Lien and lien holder's caveatHafizul Mukhlis
 
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LAND
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LANDLand Law 1 DEFINITION OF LAND
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LANDxareejx
 
Trust slide-compiled
Trust slide-compiledTrust slide-compiled
Trust slide-compiledSnj SNj
 
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes Only
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes OnlyModes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes Only
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes OnlyAzrin Hafiz
 
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)Ikram Abdul Sattar
 
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Intan Muhammad
 
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & ors v N indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & orsvN indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & orsvN indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & ors v N indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...Zaim Nur
 

What's hot (20)

past year attempt
past year attemptpast year attempt
past year attempt
 
Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 6 of Evidence Act 1950
 
Prohibitory orders
Prohibitory ordersProhibitory orders
Prohibitory orders
 
Private Caveat
Private CaveatPrivate Caveat
Private Caveat
 
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes Only
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes OnlyLand Law II notes - For Revision Purposes Only
Land Law II notes - For Revision Purposes Only
 
Security dealings charge
Security dealings   chargeSecurity dealings   charge
Security dealings charge
 
Zainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutor
Zainur Zakaria v Public ProsecutorZainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutor
Zainur Zakaria v Public Prosecutor
 
definition of land / Law of fixture
definition of land / Law of fixturedefinition of land / Law of fixture
definition of land / Law of fixture
 
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)
Tenancy exempt from registration (txr)
 
Lien
LienLien
Lien
 
Lien and lien holder's caveat
Lien and lien holder's caveatLien and lien holder's caveat
Lien and lien holder's caveat
 
charges 4
charges 4 charges 4
charges 4
 
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LAND
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LANDLand Law 1 DEFINITION OF LAND
Land Law 1 DEFINITION OF LAND
 
Trust slide-compiled
Trust slide-compiledTrust slide-compiled
Trust slide-compiled
 
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes Only
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes OnlyModes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes Only
Modes of Originating Process - For Revision Purposes Only
 
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)
Non-charitable purpose trust (short notes)
 
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
 
Tol
TolTol
Tol
 
Equity and land law (Topic 2)
Equity and land law (Topic 2)Equity and land law (Topic 2)
Equity and land law (Topic 2)
 
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & ors v N indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & orsvN indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & orsvN indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...
Datuk Seri khalid bin abu bakar & ors v N indra a/p p Nallathamby (the admi...
 

Similar to Kumon n telekom

Godfrey Morgan v Cobalt
Godfrey Morgan v CobaltGodfrey Morgan v Cobalt
Godfrey Morgan v CobaltMurray Grant
 
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986CHARAK RAY
 
Consumer protection act 1986
Consumer protection act 1986Consumer protection act 1986
Consumer protection act 1986Mayur Tyagi
 
Consumer protection act1956
Consumer protection act1956Consumer protection act1956
Consumer protection act1956Pradeep Singha
 
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint P
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint PConsumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint P
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint Pparulkaundal2025
 
Adr nina punya (97 2003)
Adr nina punya (97 2003)Adr nina punya (97 2003)
Adr nina punya (97 2003)Husna Rodzi
 
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015Matheson Law Firm
 
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptx
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptxConsumer protection Act in business law.pptx
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptxprasoona4
 
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...ASMAH CHE WAN
 
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdf
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdfThe Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdf
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdfSidharth318540
 
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices Final
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices  Final09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices  Final
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices FinalUmang Doshi
 
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal Update
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal UpdateEnforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal Update
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal UpdateMatheson Law Firm
 
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Consumer Protection Act, 2019Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Consumer Protection Act, 2019Mangal Bisen
 

Similar to Kumon n telekom (20)

Godfrey Morgan v Cobalt
Godfrey Morgan v CobaltGodfrey Morgan v Cobalt
Godfrey Morgan v Cobalt
 
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986
CONSUMER PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1986
 
Consumer protection act 1986
Consumer protection act 1986Consumer protection act 1986
Consumer protection act 1986
 
Consumer protection act1956
Consumer protection act1956Consumer protection act1956
Consumer protection act1956
 
Cpc moot 2017
Cpc moot 2017Cpc moot 2017
Cpc moot 2017
 
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint P
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint PConsumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint P
Consumer protection Act 2019 PowerPoint P
 
Adr slides
Adr slidesAdr slides
Adr slides
 
Adr nina punya (97 2003)
Adr nina punya (97 2003)Adr nina punya (97 2003)
Adr nina punya (97 2003)
 
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015
Breyer Group PLC and Others 2015
 
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptx
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptxConsumer protection Act in business law.pptx
Consumer protection Act in business law.pptx
 
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...
CIVIL PROCEDURE: PROCEDURE OF FILING AN APPEAL FROM SUBORDINATE COURT TO THE ...
 
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdf
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdfThe Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdf
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 AMENDMENT.pdf
 
CPA (1).pptx
CPA (1).pptxCPA (1).pptx
CPA (1).pptx
 
CPA (1).pptx
CPA (1).pptxCPA (1).pptx
CPA (1).pptx
 
CPA.pptx
CPA.pptxCPA.pptx
CPA.pptx
 
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices Final
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices  Final09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices  Final
09 Mba Bl Lec Nov 18 Cpa & Unfair Trade Practices Final
 
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal Update
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal UpdateEnforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal Update
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Ireland: Irish Court of Appeal Update
 
ITU 08/2016
ITU 08/2016ITU 08/2016
ITU 08/2016
 
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Consumer Protection Act, 2019Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
 
Technical claims-brief-january-2010
Technical claims-brief-january-2010Technical claims-brief-january-2010
Technical claims-brief-january-2010
 

Kumon n telekom

  • 1. 1. HaslindabteHamzah versus Kumon Method of Learning Centre 2. Telekom Malaysia Bhd versus Tribunal TuntutanPengguna & Anor NUR IDIENTEE BINTI ABD HALIM (806092) ATHIRAH MOHD TAN (806265) ROSLAN BIN RIDZUAN (806481)
  • 2.
  • 3. Court Of Appeal at Putrajaya. ( 2006 ).
  • 4. The respondent ran a tuition centre and the appellant enroll three children in it.
  • 5.
  • 6. The tribunal ordered the respondent to make a partial refund.
  • 7. The respondent applied to the High Court for judicial review to quash the tribunal’s decision.
  • 8. The judicial commissioner quashed the tribunal’s award on the ground that it had not given written reasons for its award in accordance with s 114 of Consumer Protection Act 1999.
  • 10. Now the appellant use the own name and Tribunal just for support their claims.
  • 11. Tribunal like the middleman to settle the appellant judge to respondent.
  • 12.
  • 13. Whether tribunal could order partial refund.
  • 14.
  • 15. Tribunal has been conferred with extraordinary powers to do speedy justice for customers. Its awards should not be struck down save in the rarest of cases. Where it has misinterpreted some provision of the Act in such a way to produce an injustice. Court should be ever remindful that certiorari is not a remedy that is available as of right. It is not every error of law committed by an inferior tribunal that entitles the High Court to issues certiorari.
  • 16. The High Courts do not, and should not, act as courts of appeal under art 226.
  • 17. The appellant win in this case because more their evidence and support by the Tribunal and Consumer Protection Act 1999.
  • 18.
  • 19. In my opinion. This case just about the refund the tuition fees, not big or much amount. No need settle all this in court, just waste time and money.
  • 20. The Tribunal doing their task or function very well. Customer know where their can go if have the problems about the business transaction.
  • 21.
  • 22. High court in Melaka
  • 23. The applicant billed the second respondent for RM98 in relation to international calls said to be made by the second respondent to Papua New Guinea.
  • 24.
  • 25. The applicant filed notice of motion for judicial review to nullify the decision made by the first respondent :
  • 26. The tribunal was the wrong forum to bring the dispute to.
  • 27.
  • 28.
  • 29.
  • 30. The judge believes that the second respondent had elected the wrong forum to bring the dispute to the tribunal as it is outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal
  • 31.
  • 32.
  • 33.
  • 34. We believe that tribunal should not have made this jurisdictional error.
  • 35. Knowing that this case is not under the jurisdiction of the tribunal, the tribunal should have played their role of customer protection by providing insights and suggestions to consumers instead.
  • 36. We believe that it is of a better benefit that the tribunal apply from the minister to include the transactions affected by electronic in the CPA 1999; or the inclusion s 188(1)(a) and (b) and s 190(1)(b) of the CMA 1998 in its jurisdiction.