QUESTION 3.

Identify whether trespass to person has been committed in the following

situations and justify your answers.
b) Datin suspected Cinta is having an affair with her husband. One day, Datin happened to
meet Cinta at a saloon. Feeling very angry, Datin grabbed Cinta's hair and slapped her
face. (30 marks)
Trespass to the person means a direct or an intentional interference with a person's body
or liberty. A trespass which was also a breach of the King's peace, however, fell within the
jurisdiction of the King's courts, and in course of time the allegation that the trespass was
committed vi et armis (By force and arms) came to be used as common form in order to preserve
the jurisdictional propriety of an action brought in those courts, whether or not there was any
truth in it.
In this case, trepass to person has been commited because datin ( Defendant ) having an
intention to harm Cinta ( Plantiff ). In this case, type of trepass to person involved is assault.
Datin suspected Cinta is having an affair with her husband. One day, Datin happened to meet
Cinta at a saloon. Feeling very angry, Datin grabbed Cinta's hair and slapped her face.
An assault is an act which intentionally causes another person to apprehend the infliction of
immediate, unlawful, force on his person.Datin intentionally causes Cinta to apprehend the
infliction of immediate, unlawful.
The elements of assault is Intention of the Defendant to do harm onto the Plaintiff . Datin
having an intention to harm Cinta because once his know that Cinta having an affair with his
husband she became very angry. Secondly is datins act will effect Cintas mind. Datin also have
an capabilities to carry out the threat to attack Cinta. Lastly datin grabbed Cinta's hair and
slapped her face is kind of bodily movement of the Datin.

c) Macho was suspected of pick pocketing at a supermarket. Pending the arrival of the
police, under the instruction of the management, Macho had been taken to a room. Jaga
was instructed to stand on guard and not to allow Macho to leave. After three hours,
Macho was found to be innocent and was released.( 30 marks )
Macho was suspected of pick pocketing at a supermarket. Pending the arrival of the
police, under the instruction of the management, Macho had been taken to a room. Jaga was
instructed to stand on guard and not to allow Macho to leave. After three hours, Macho was
found to be innocent and was released.In this case In this case trepass to person has been
commited. Macho was suspected of pick pocketing and jaga was instructed to stand on guard and
not allow macho to leave. Macho was innocent and then he has been realeased. Thus, the effect
on the machos mind created by the threat is the crux, not whether the jaga actually had the
intention or means to follow it up. The intent required for the tort of assault is the desire to
arouse an apprehension of physical contact, not necessarily an intention to inflict actual harm
An assault is any direct and intentional threat made by a person that places the plaintiff in
reasonable apprehension of an imminent contact with the plaintiffs person, either by the
defendant or by some person or thing within the defendants control: K Barker, P Cane, M
Lunney and F Trindade,The Law of Torts In Australia, 5th edn, Oxford University Press,
Australia and New Zealand, 2011 at 44 (Barker et al).

In State of New South Wales v Ibbett (2005) 65 NSWLR 168 the Court of Appeal upheld
the trial judges factual findings while increasing the damages awarded. The circumstances of the
case were that two policemen gave chase to Mr Ibbett, in the township of Foster, suspecting that
he may have been involved in a criminal offence. They pursued him to a house where he lived
with his mother, Mrs Ibbett. Without legal justification, one of the policemen entered the
property and arrested Mr Ibbett. His mother came into the garage where these events occurred.
The police officer produced a gun and pointed it at Mrs Ibbett saying, Open the bloody door and
let my mate in. Mrs Ibbett, who was an elderly woman, had never seen a gun before and was,
not unnaturally, petrified.

The trial judge held that both police officers had been on the property without unlawful
justification and, additionally, the confrontation between the police officer and Mrs Ibbett was
more than sufficient to justify the requirements of an immediate apprehension of harm on her
part, so as to amount to an assault. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge as later did
the High Court. See also Clarke JA in Cowell v Corrective Services Commission (NSW) (1988)13
NSWLR 714.

QUESTION 2
Puteri is an up and coming singer. Recently, Puteri won an award for the best song entitled
"Tolong Hangatkan Aku" in Juara Lagu programme. Being a new comer in the industry
and competing among the best and top singers in Malaysia, Puteri's winning had caused
much uncalled critics and uproars. Faizal Shahir, who was one of the favourite singers and
was speculated to win, when interviewed by "Aura" an entertainment magazine,
commented: "She does not deserve to win. Her singing is below standard. Most
importantly, do not be deceived by her appearance. She may seem innocent as she wears
baju kurung and kebaya during all her shows but she is capable of doing everything to
ensure her winning. I really mean everything... including sleeping with the judges". As a
consequence of the comment, Puteri stopped receiving invitations to perform at any shows.
The sale of her album also has dropped tremendously. Much to her fear, her fans started to
shun her away. Advise Puteri whether she could commence any legal action against the
parties involved. (100 marks)

Puteri is an up and coming singer. Recently, Puteri won an award for the best song
entitled "Tolong Hangatkan Aku" in Juara Lagu programme. Being a new comer in the industry
and competing among the best and top singers in Malaysia, Puteri's winning had caused much
uncalled critics and uproars. Faizal Shahir, who was one of the favourite singers and was
speculated to win, when interviewed by "Aura" an entertainment magazine, commented: "She
does not deserve to win. Her singing is below standard. Most importantly, do not be deceived by
her appearance. She may seem innocent as she wears baju kurung and kebaya during all her
shows but she is capable of doing everything to ensure her winning.
In this case Puteri should had to commence common law and Defamation Act 1957
against faizal Shahir. This is because Faizal Shahir had damage Puteris name. Faizal Shahirs
statement "She does not deserve to win. Her singing is below standard. Most importantly, do not
be deceived by her appearance. She may seem innocent as she wears baju kurung and kebaya
during all her shows but she is capable of doing everything to ensure her winning. I really mean
everything... including sleeping with the judges" has tendency to lower a Puteris reputation or
cause her to be shunned or avoided by reasonable person in society thereby adversely affecting

his reputation. The words spoken by faizal shahirs is in jest and understood by those hearing
them as jest.
Faizal Shahirs has slander Puteri carrier and as a consequence of the comment, Puteri
stopped receiving invitations to perform at any shows. The sale of her album also has dropped
tremendously. Much to her fear, her fans started to shun her away.because of faizal Shahirs
slander Puteris having an actual financial loss or any loss that may be measured in monetary
term.
According to S5 of Defamation Act 1957, where words are calculated to disparage the
Plaintiff in any office, profession, calling, trade or business at the time of publication it shall not
be necessary for the plaintiff to prove special damage. Based on case of C Sivarathan v
Abdullah b Dato Hj Abdul Rahman (1984) 1 MLJ 62 The defendant called the plaintiff a
cheat, dishonest and a liar. The court held that since these crimes did not attract corporal
punishment the plaintiffs claim was not actionable per se and the Plaintiffs action failed as he
could not prove special or actual damage.
For the conclusion and my point of view, faizal Shahir should liable for his slander
under the defamation act. Because of his word, Puteri stopped receiving invitations to perform at
any shows. The sale of her album also has dropped tremendously.

PARTB

QUESTION 1
Boncet bought a set of slimming products consisting of slimming pills and slimming lotion
called "De Montel De Cornel" from Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd, a company well known
for the manufacturing of slimming products. A week after using both products, Boncet
suffered severe stomach ailment and found that blisters and rashes has developed on her
abdomen. Later, Boncet learnt that her illness was due to the usage of the slimming
products. Dr. Jimi further informed her that the manufacturer used some chemicals that
had been banned by the Ministry of Health. As a result, Boncet now is suffering from an
excessive damage to her internal organs. Advise Boncet whether she has any cause of action
against Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd. (100 marks)
Boncet bought a set of slimming products consisting of slimming pills and slimming lotion
called "De Montel De Cornel" from Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd, a company well known for the
manufacturing of slimming products. A week after using both products, Boncet suffered severe
stomach ailment and found that blisters and rashes has developed on her abdomen. Later, Boncet
learnt that her illness was due to the usage of the slimming products. Boncet should have to take
an action against Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd because under the law of Tort Negligence.
Negligence the breach of a legal duty to take care which results in damage to the plaintiff
undesired by the defendant.
Because of Keanggunan Abad isdn Bhd negligence then, Boncet learnt that her illness was due to
the usage of the slimming products. Dr. Jimi further informed her that the manufacturer used
some chemicals that had been banned by the Ministry of Health. As a result, Boncet now is
suffering from an excessive damage to her internal organs. Advise Boncet whether she has any
cause of action against Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd.Keanggunan Abadi Sdn Bhd have been
breach of duty of care that cause the consequential damage to the Boncet

The primary test or principle used to determine the existence of a duty of care is the famous
neighbour principle. This principle was laid down in the landmark case of Donoghue v
Stevenson (1932)