KAEDAH-KAEDAH MAHKAMAH (PINDAAN) 2020

Kaedah-kaedah ini bolehlah dinamakan Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah

(Pindaan) 2020.

Kaedah-Kaedah ini mula berkuat kuasa pada 15 Disember 2020.

Pindaan Aturan 1

Mahkamah atau Pendaftar boleh, tertakluk kepada arahan amalan yang dikeluarkan berhubung dengan maksud itu, mengarahkan bahawa apa-apa kausa atau perkara di bawah Kaedah-Kaedah ini didengar atau mana-mana prosiding dijalankan melalui suatu teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh sebagaimana yang diluluskan oleh Mahkamah.

Kuasa yang diberikan kepada Mahkamah atau Pendaftar dalam perenggan (1) boleh dijalankan atas usulnya sendiri atau atas permohonan yang dibuat oleh mana-mana pihak kepada suatu prosiding.

Jika suatu permohonan dibuat di bawah perenggan (2),

Mahkamah atau Pendaftar boleh memberikan arahan tentang perjalanan lanjut prosiding itu berhubung dengan kausa atau perkara itu.

Kehadiran orang, saksi atau banduan sebagai saksi atau pihak melalui teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh (A. 33A, k. 3)

Berhubung dengan kehadiran mana-mana orang, saksi atau banduan sebagai saksi atau pihak dalam mana-mana prosiding atau keterangan yang diberikan secara sendiri,

Mahkamah atau

Pendaftar boleh,

P.U. (A) 351 4

setelah berpuas hati bahawa semua syarat yang dinyatakan dalam perenggan (2)

ditunaikan, mengarahkan orang, saksi atau banduan sebagai saksi atau pihak itu—

untuk hadir (selain memberikan keterangan) dalam prosiding itu, secara teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh; atau

untuk memberikan keterangan melalui teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh.

Syarat yang disebut dalam perenggan (1) adalah seperti yang berikut:

dalam hal seseorang, untuk hadir semasa tempoh yang dinyatakan dan daripada suatu tempat yang dinyatakan oleh Mahkamah atau Pendaftar menggunakan teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh itu;

dalam hal seorang saksi, untuk memberikan keterangan semasa tempoh yang dinyatakan dan daripada suatu tempat yang dinyatakan oleh

Mahkamah atau

Pendaftar menggunakan teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh itu;

dalam hal seorang banduan sebagai saksi atau pihak, untuk hadir atau memberikan keterangan semasa tempoh yang dinyatakan dan daripada suatu tempat yang dinyatakan oleh Mahkamah atau Pendaftar menggunakan teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh itu, dengan syarat bahawa—

dia seorang saksi atau suatu pihak; dan

pihak-pihak dan Pegawai yang Menjaga yang disebut di bawah Akta Penjara [Akta 537] bersetuju untuk

5

menggunakan teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh itu;

dan

Mahkamah atau Pendaftar berpuas hati bahawa terdapat kemudahan pentadbiran dan teknikal yang mencukupi dan perkiraan dibuat di tempat yang orang, saksi atau banduan sebagai saksi atau pihak itu akan hadir atau memberikan keterangan.

Kehadiran dan keterangan yang diberikan melalui teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh dalam mana-mana prosiding mengikut arahan

Mahkamah atau Pendaftar di bawah perenggan (1) boleh dikira sebagai kehadiran dan keterangan yang diberikan secara sendiri dalam prosiding itu dan menjadi sebahagian daripada rekod prosiding bagi Mahkamah itu atau di hadapan Pendaftar.

Kuasa untuk membatalkan arahan (A.33A, k.4)

teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh itu berhenti berfungsi dan ia akan menyebabkan kelewatan yang tidak munasabah untuk menunggu sehingga sistem berfungsi boleh didapati;

adalah perlu untuk Mahkamah atau Pendaftar berbuat demikian untuk mematuhi tanggungjawabnya bagi memastikan bahawa prosiding dijalankan secara adil kepada pihak-pihak dalam prosiding;

telah berlakunya suatu perubahan material dalam hal keadaan selepas Mahkamah atau Pendaftar telah membuat sesuatu perintah; atau

P.U. (A) 351 6

adalah perlu demi kepentingan keadilan untuk berbuat demikian.

Membolehkan orang awam untuk melihat dan mendengar prosiding (A. 33A, k. 5)

Sekiranya Mahkamah atau Pendaftar mengarahkan bahawa prosiding hendaklah dijalankan sepenuhnya melalui suatu teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh, Mahkamah atau Pendaftar boleh mengarahkan bahawa—

prosiding itu hendaklah disiarkan (mengikut cara yang dinyatakan dalam arahan) bagi maksud membolehkan orang awam melihat dan mendengar prosiding itu; atau

suatu rakaman prosiding itu hendaklah dibuat

(mengikut cara yang dinyatakan dalam arahan) bagi maksud membolehkan Mahkamah atau Pendaftar untuk menyimpan suatu rekod audio-visual prosiding itu.

Suatu arahan di bawah kaedah ini boleh berhubungan dengan keseluruhan atau sebahagian prosiding yang berkenaan.”.

Pindaan Aturan 34

dalam kaedah 2—

dengan memasukkan selepas perenggan (1) perenggan yang berikut:

“(1A)

Sekiranya hakim Mahkamah Tinggi mengenal pasti bahawa suatu isu yang berbangkit dalam tindakan atau prosiding antara pihak-pihak boleh diselesaikan melalui mediasi, hakim itu boleh merujukkan pihak-pihak kepada mediasi

7

sebagaimana yang ditetapkan oleh arahan amalan yang dikeluarkan dari semasa ke semasa.

Semua kes kemalangan jalan raya hendaklah tertakluk kepada mediasi.”;

dalam perenggan (2)—

dengan memotong subperenggan (a);

dengan memotong perkataan

“dan”

di hujung subperenggan (s);

dalam subperenggan (t), dengan menggantikan perkataan

“tarikh perbicaraan itu.”

dengan perkataan

“tarikh perbicaraan itu; dan”; dan

dengan memasukkan selepas subperenggan

subperenggan yang berikut:

“(u)

cara bagaimana tindakan atau prosiding itu hendak dijalankan.”; dan

dengan menggantikan kaedah 5 dengan kaedah yang berikut—

“(5)

Tertakluk kepada peruntukan Kaedah-Kaedah ini, pengurusan kes sebelum bicara boleh ditangguhkan tidak lebih daripada tiga kali, melainkan jika hal keadaan menghendaki selainnya.”.

Pindaan Aturan 35

dalam kaedah 1, dengan memasukkan selepas perenggan

perenggan yang berikut:

“(5) Kaedah ini hendaklah terpakai kepada setiap penghakiman atau perintah yang diumumkan atau diberikan dalam prosiding yang diadakan melalui suatu teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh.”;

dalam kaedah 1A—

dengan menomborkan semula kaedah sedia ada sebagai perenggan (1); dan

dengan memasukkan selepas perenggan

perenggan yang berikut:

“(2) Kaedah ini hendaklah terpakai kepada setiap penghakiman atau perintah yang diumumkan atau diberikan dalam prosiding yang diadakan melalui suatu teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh jika prosiding itu didengar secara tertutup.”; dan

dalam kaedah 5, dengan memasukkan selepas perenggan

perenggan yang berikut:

9

“(4)

Jika penghakiman atau perintah diumumkan atau diberikan dalam prosiding yang diadakan melalui suatu teknologi komunikasi jarak jauh, fakta itu hendaklah digambarkan dalam penghakiman atau perintah itu.”.

Pindaan Aturan 55

Sekiranya suatu dokumen —

selain suatu dokumen yang dikehendaki oleh

Kaedah-Kaedah ini untuk disampaikan secara ke diri; atau

adalah dokumen yang dikehendaki oleh Kaedah-Kaedah ini untuk disampaikan secara ke diri dan pihak yang kepadanya hendak disampaikan telah bersetuju supaya dokumen itu disampaikan menggunakan perkhidmatan pemfailan elektronik,

P.U. (A) 351 10

dikehendaki di bawah mana-mana peruntukan Kaedah-Kaedah ini untuk disampaikan kepada mana-mana orang dan orang itu ialah seorang pengguna berdaftar atau diwakili oleh seorang peguam yang juga merupakan seorang pengguna berdaftar (disebut dalam Kaedah-Kaedah ini sebagai orang yang kepadanya dokumen itu disampaikan), penyampaian itu boleh disempurnakan dengan menggunakan perkhidmatan pemfailan elektronik tertakluk kepada apa-apa arahan Mahkamah atau apa-apa arahan amalan pada masa itu yang dikeluarkan bagi maksud itu.

Bagi maksud subperenggan (1)(b), suatu pihak yang mengarahkan peguamnya untuk menerima penyampaian suatu dokumen yang dikehendaki oleh Kaedah-Kaedah ini untuk disampaikan secara ke diri hendaklah disifatkan telah bersetuju untuk disampaikan menggunakan perkhidmatan pemfailan elektronik.

Dokumen itu hendaklah disifatkan telah disampaikan melalui penghantaran elektronik daripada sistem komputer pengguna berdaftar pada tarikh dan masa bahagian pertama penghantaran itu diterima dalam sistem komputer Mahkamah.

Orang yang menyampaikan dokumen itu boleh mengemukakan suatu rekod penyampaian kepada orang yang kepadanya dokumen itu disampaikan yang dikeluarkan oleh sistem komputer Mahkamah atau biro perkhidmatan sebagai keterangan penyampaian, juga tarikh dan masa penyampaian itu.

Orang yang menyampaikan dokumen itu boleh memfailkan bukti penyampaian melalui perkhidmatan pemfailan elektronik.

Apabila suatu dokumen perlu disampaikan oleh orang yang menyampaikan dokumen itu kepada lebih daripada seorang, dia boleh membuat penyampaian menggunakan perkhidmatan pemfailan elektronik kepada orang itu yang merupakan pengguna berdaftar dan perenggan (1), (3), (4) dan (5)

11

Kaedah-Kaedah ini hendaklah terpakai dengan sewajarnya dengan ubah suaian yang perlu.”.

Pindaan Aturan 65

ketidahpatuhan itu; dan

peruntukan yang mesti dipatuhi sebelum permintaan boleh dipertimbangkan selanjutnya.”.

Pindaan Aturan 70

Ketua Hakim Negara selepas berunding dengan Hakim Besar boleh mengeluarkan apa-apa arahan amalan sebagaimana yang difikirkan perlu—

bagi melaksanakan atau menguatkuasakan peruntukan

Kaedah-Kaedah ini dengan lebih baik; atau

sekiranya Ketua Hakim Negara berpendapat bahawa hal keadaan mewajarkan dan adalah perlu demi kepentingan pelaksanaan keadilan, kesejahteraan awam, keselamatan awam, kesihatan atau kesusilaan awam atau bagi sebab lain yang mencukupi untuk berbuat demikian.

Hakim Besar selepas berunding dengan Ketua Hakim Negara boleh mengeluarkan apa-apa arahan amalan sebagaimana yang difikirkan perlu bagi melaksanakan atau menguatkuasakan peruntukan Kaedah-Kaedah ini dengan lebih baik.”.

Pindaan Aturan 93

dengan menggantikan perenggan (2) dengan perenggan yang berikut:

“(2)

Dalam Aturan ini—

“orang yang diberi kuasa” ertinya—

seseorang yang diberi kuasa oleh undang-undang untuk mewakili defendan selain peguam cara; atau

dalam hal syarikat atau organisasi, orang yang berkhidmat sebagai seorang pekerja bergaji sepenuh masa dan

13

diberi kuasa oleh syarikat atau organisasi yang syarikat atau organisasi itu ialah suatu pihak;

“plaintif” ertinya seorang individu yang bukan seorang agen atau pemegang serah hak apa-apa hutang orang lain.”; dan

dengan memasukkan selepas perenggan (2) perenggan yang berikut:

“(3)

Aturan 5, kaedah 6(2) dan Aturan 12, kaedah 1(2) tidak terpakai bagi Aturan ini.”.

Dibuat 14 Disember 2020

[PKPMP.BD.600-1/5/26; PN(PU2)153/XIX]

P.U. (A) 351 14

Jawatankuasa Kaedah-Kaedah:

Ketua Hakim Negara, Malaysia

Hakim Besar Mahkamah Tinggi di Malaya

Hakim Besar Mahkamah Tinggi di Sabah dan Sarawak

Peguam Negara, Malaysia

Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan

Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan

Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi di Malaya

Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi di Sabah dan Sarawak

Ketua Pendaftar Mahkamah Persekutuan

Peguam bela, Semenanjung Malaysia

15

Peguam bela, Sabah

Peguam bela, Sarawak

Jawatankuasa Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Rendah:

Ketua Hakim Negara, Malaysia

Hakim Besar Mahkamah Tinggi di Malaya

Hakim Besar Mahkamah Tinggi di Sabah dan Sarawak

Peguam Negara, Malaysia

Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan

Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan

Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi di Malaya

Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi di Sabah dan Sarawak

Ketua Pendaftar Mahkamah Persekutuan

P.U. (A) 351 16

Peguam bela, Semenanjung Malaysia

Peguam bela, Sabah

Peguam bela, Sarawak

[Akan dibentangkan di

Dewan

Rakyat menurut subseksyen 17(5)

Akta

Mahkamah

Kehakiman 1964

dan seksyen 8

Akta

Kaedah-Kaedah

Mahkamah Rendah 1955]

17

COURTS OF JUDICATURE ACT 1964

SUBORDINATE COURTS RULES ACT 1955

RULES OF COURT (AMENDMENT) 2020

These rules may be cited as the Rules of Court (Amendment) 2020.

These Rules come into operation on 15 December 2020.

Amendment of Order 1 2.

The Rules of Court 2012 [P.U. (A) 205/2012], which are referred to as the

“principal Rules” in these Rules, are amended in Order 1, rule 4(1) by inserting after the definition of “ sign” the following definition:

‘ “remote communication technology” has the same meaning assigned to it under the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, the Subordinate Courts Act 1948

and the Subordinate Courts Rules Act 1955;’.

Amendment of Order 10 3.

Order 10, rule 1(1) of the principal Rules is amended by inserting after the words

“his last known address” the words “or by means of electronic communication in accordance with any practice direction issued for that purpose”.

P.U. (A) 351 18

New Order 33A

The Court or Registrar may, subject to the practice direction issued in relation to such purpose, direct that any cause or matter under these Rules is to be heard or any proceeding is to be conducted through a remote communication technology as approved by the Court.

The power conferred on the Court or Registrar in paragraph (1)

may be exercised on its own motion or upon application made by any party to a proceeding.

Where an application is made under paragraph (2), the Court or Registrar may give directions as to the further conduct of the proceedings in relation to the cause or matter.

Attendance of person, witness or prisoner as witness or party by way of remote communication technology (0. 33A, r. 3)

In relation to the attendance of any person, witness or prisoner as witness or party, in any proceedings or the evidence to be given in person, the Court or Registrar may, on being satisfied that all the conditions specified in paragraph (2) are fulfilled, direct the person, witness or prisoner as witness or party—

19

to attend (other than to give evidence) in those proceedings, by means of remote communication technology; or

to give evidence through remote communication technology.

The conditions referred to in paragraph (1) are as follows:

in the case of a person, to attend during the specified period and from a place specified by the Court or Registrar using the remote communication technology;

in the case of a witness, to give evidence during the specified period and from a place specified by the Court or Registrar using the remote communication technology;

in the case of a prisoner as a witness or a party, to attend or give evidence during the specified period and from a place specified by the Court or Registrar using the remote communication technology, provided that—

he is a witness or a party; and

the parties and the Officer in Charge referred to under the Prison Act 1995 [Act 537] consent to the use of the remote communication technology; and

the Court or Registrar is satisfied that sufficient administrative and technical facilities and arrangements are made at the place where the person, witness or prisoner as a witness or party is to make an appearance or to give evidence.

P.U. (A) 351 20

Appearance and evidence given through remote communication technology in any proceedings in accordance with a

Court’s or Registrar’s direction under paragraph (1) are taken to be appearance and evidence given in person in those proceedings and form part of the record of the proceedings of that Court or before the Registrar.

Power to revoke direction (O. 33A, r. 4)

the remote communication technology stops working and it would cause unreasonable delay to wait until a working system becomes available;

it is necessary for the Court or Registrar to do so to comply with its duty to ensure that the proceedings are conducted fairly to the parties in the proceedings;

there has been a material change in the circumstances after the Court or Registrar has made an order; or

it is necessary in the interests of justice to do so.

Enabling the public to see and hear proceedings (O. 33A, r. 5)

If the Court or Registrar directs that proceedings are to be conducted wholly through a remote communication technology, the Court or Registrar may direct that—

the proceedings are to be broadcasted

(in the manner specified in the direction) for the purpose of enabling members of the public to see and hear the proceedings; or

21

a recording of the proceedings is to be made

(in the manner specified in the direction) for the purpose of enabling the Court or Registrar to keep an audio-visual record of the proceedings.

A direction under this rule may relate to the whole or to part of the proceedings concerned.”.

Amendment of Order 34 5.

Order 34 of the principal Rules is amended—

in rule 2—

by inserting after paragraph (1) the following paragraphs:

“(1A) If a judge of the High Court identifies that an issue arising in the action or proceedings between the parties can be resolved by way of mediation, the judge may refer the parties to mediation as prescribed by practice directions issued from time to time.

All running down cases shall be subject to mediation.”;

in paragraph (2)—

by deleting subparagraph (a);

by deleting the word “and” at the end of subparagraph (s);

in subparagraph (t), by substituting for the words

“the date for trial.” the words “the date for trial; and”; and

P.U. (A) 351 22

by inserting after subparagraph

the following subparagraph:

“(u)

the manner in which the action or proceedings is to be conducted.”; and

by substituting for rule 5 the following rule—

“(5)

Subject to the provisions of these Rules, a pre-trial case management may be adjourned not more than three times, unless the circumstances otherwise require.”.

Amendment of Order 35 6.

Order 35 of the principal Rules is amended by substituting for rule 3

the following rule—

“3.

Subject to the provisions of these Rules, the Judge may, if he thinks it is expedient in the interest of justice, adjourn a trial not more than three times, unless the circumstances otherwise require, and upon such terms, if any, as he thinks fit.”.

Amendment of Order 42

in rule 1, by inserting after paragraph (4) the following paragraph:

“(5) This rule shall apply to every judgment or order pronounced or delivered in the proceeding held through a remote communication technology.”;

23

in rule 1A—

by renumbering the existing rule as paragraph (1); and

by inserting after paragraph (1) the following paragraph:

“(2) This rule shall apply to every judgment or order pronounced or delivered in the proceeding held through a remote communication technology where such proceedings are heard in camera.”; and

in rule 5, by inserting after paragraph (3) the following paragraph:

“(4)

Where judgment or order is pronounced or delivered in the proceeding held through a remote communication technology, such facts shall be reflected in the judgment or order.”.

Amendment of Order 55 8.

Order 55, rule 5(2) of the principal Rules is amended by substituting for the word “serving” the words “shall within the time limited for the filing of the appeal serve”.

Amendment of Order 62 9.

Order 62, rule 6 of the principal Rules is amended by inserting after subparagraph (1)(c) the following subparagraph:

“(cc)

by means of electronic communication in accordance with any practice direction issued for that purpose;”.

P.U. (A) 351 24

Amendment of Order 63A

If a document—

other than a document which is required by these Rules to be served personally; or

being a document which is required by these Rules to be served personally and which the party to be served has agreed for the document to be served using the electronic filing service, is required under any other provision of these Rules to be served to any person and that person is a registered user or is represented by a solicitor who is also a registered user (referred to in these Rules as the person on whom the document is served ), such service may be affected by using the electronic filing service subject to any direction of the Court or any practice direction for the time being issued for that purpose.

For the purposes of subparagraph (1)(b), a party who has instructed his solicitor to accept service of a document which is required by these Rules to be served personally shall be deemed to have agreed to be served using the electronic filing service.

The document shall be deemed to be served by electronic transmission from the computer system of the registered users on the date and at the time that the first part of the transmission is received in the Court’s computer system.

The person serving the document may produce a record of the service to the person on whom the document is served which is issued by the Court’s

25

computer system or the service bureau as evidence of the service, as well as the date and time of such service.

The person serving the document may file proof of service through the electronic filing service.

Where a document has to be served by the person serving the document to more than one person, he may effect such service using the electronic filing service on such persons who are registered users and paragraphs (1), (3), (4)

and (5) of this Rule shall apply accordingly with the necessary modifications.”.

Amendment of Order 65 11.

Order 65, rule 2 of the principal Rules is amended by inserting after paragraph (2)

the following paragraph:

“(2A) Where the Minister considers that the letter of request does not comply with paragraph (1) or (2), the Minister must inform the requesting court or tribunal of that foreign country in respect to—

the non-compliance; and

the provisions that must be complied with before the request may be further considered.”.

Amendment of Order 70 12.

Order 70, rule 10 of the principal Rules is amended by inserting after paragraph (1) the following paragraph:

"(1A) Notwithstanding paragraph (1) above, the Court or Registrar may, in exceptional circumstances, direct that the service of the writ in an action in rem or a warrant of arrest be effected by affixing the writ or warrant on the outside of any suitable part of the ship’s hull or superstructure and followed immediately thereafter with an electronic communication of a copy thereof by or on behalf

P.U. (A) 351 26

of the Sheriff as notice to the owners and/or demise charterers of the ship, the ship’s master or managers or local agent, and the relevant marine department, by e-mail or other means.".

Amendment of Order 92 13.

Order 92 of the principal Rules is amended by substituting for rule 3B the following rule:

"Practice directions (O. 92, r. 3B)

The Chief Justice after consulting the Chief Judge may issue such practice directions as may be necessary—

for the better carrying out or giving effect to the provisions of these Rules; or

if the Chief Justice is of the opinion that the circumstances warrant that it is necessary in the interest of the dispensation of justice, public safety, public security, public health or propriety or for other sufficient reason to do so.

The Chief Judge after consulting the Chief Justice may issue such practice directions as may be necessary for the better carrying out or giving effect to the provisions of these Rules.”.

Amendment of Order 93 14.

Order 93, rule 1 of the principal Rules is amended—

by substituting for paragraph (2) the following paragraph:

“(2)

In this Order—

27

“an authorized person” means—

a person who is authorized by law to represent a defendant other than a solicitor; or

in a case of a company or organization, a person who serves as a full time paid employee and authorized by a company or organization in which a company or organization is a party;

“plaintiff” means an individual person who is not an agent or assignee of any debt of another person.”; and

by inserting after paragraph (2) the following paragraph:

“(3)

Order 5, rule 6(2) and Order 12, rule 1(2) are not applicable to this Order.”.

Made 14 December 2020

[PKPMP.BD.600-1/5/26; PN(PU2)153/XIX]

P.U. (A) 351 28

Rules Committee:

Chief Justice, Malaysia

President of the Court of Appeal, Malaysia

Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya

Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak

Attorney General, Malaysia

Judge of the Federal Court

Judge of the Court of Appeal

Judge of the High Court in Malaya

Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak

TUAN AHMAD TERRIRUDIN BIN MOHD SALLEH

Chief Registrar of the Federal Court

Advocate, Peninsular Malaysia

Advocate, Sabah

29

Advocate, Sarawak

Subordinate Courts Rules Committee:

Chief Justice, Malaysia

President of the Court of Appeal, Malaysia

Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya

Chief Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak

Attorney General, Malaysia

Judge of the Federal Court

Judge of the Court of Appeal

Judge of the High Court in Malaya

Judge of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak

Chief Registrar of the Federal Court

Advocate, Peninsular Malaysia

P.U. (A) 351 30

Advocate, Sabah

Advocate, Sarawak

[To be laid before the Dewan Rakyat pursuant to subsection 17(5) of the Courts of Judicature

Act 1964 and section 8 of the Subordinate Courts Rules Act 1955]