DISCUSSION

BUSINESS AND CYBERLAWS

MAY SEMESTER 2019
 TEST MAY 2019

Question 1
• Mr. Ady was the manager of Future Wealth Sdn. Bhd. His firm was in need of sale supervisor and therefore
he advertised in the newspaper as follows:
• “Future Wealth Sdn Bhd is offering the post of sale supervisor to suitable candidates”.
• a. Name and explain the legal status of the advertisement made by Mr. Ady.

• b. A week later, Nancy called up the firm and accept the offer. However the company told that she was
not fit for the post. She was very disappointed and decided to sue the company.
[5 marks]
QUESTION 2

• Ben was a part time student students of Excel college. Since he was working full time basis in a private
company, he promised to pay his wife, Sara RM500 if she prepared and type his assignment which he
had to submit by the end of the week. Sara agreed and executed the assigned task. Ben later refused to
pay Sara and claimed that he was not serious in making the offer.
• a. Suggest whether there was a valid contractual relation between Ben and Sara.
• [5 marks]
• b. Explain the requirement of law for Sara to claim the promised amount by Ben.
[5 marks]
PART B : TRUE / FALSE QUESTION (5
MARKS)
• 1. An offer must be made to a specific person. It cannot be made openly to any person, a class of people, or to the
whole world.
TRUE / FALSE
• 2. As a general proposition of law, the acceptance of the offer made by one party by the other party is what
creates the contract.
TRUE / FALSE
• 3. A contract made by intoxicated person is not void.
TRUE / FALSE
• 4. Website advertisement will be considered as a valid offer.
TRUE / FALSE

• 5. The general rule is that a minor has the capacity to enter into acontract.
TRUE / FALSE
PART C : OBJECTIVE QUESTION [5 MARKS]

• 1. The supreme law of Malaysia is • 2. The highest court of Malaysia is

__________________. ___________________.
• A. Privy Council Court
• A. Federal Constitution • B. Federal Court
• B. Parliament • C. Appeal Court
• C. Unwritten law • D. Magistrate Court
• D. Senate •
• 3. Criminal law is within the category of • 4. Legislative is an institution that
__________________. ___________________.
• A. civil law • A. execute the law
• B. private law • B. make the law
• C. state law • C. enforce the law
• D. public law • D. protect the law
• 5. ____________________ is within the
category of written law.
•
• A. Federal constitution
• B. Custom
• C. English law
• D. Court principles
 QUESTIO
N1
Sunny is the son of Karim, who are
tenant of a home unit owned by Dann.
He is staying alone in that house since
he still need to finish his secondary
school’s term. Ten days ago Sunny
received a letter from Dann in which
Dann stated that he (Dann) was
‘interested in selling’ his flat and asking
Sunny to ‘let him know’ if he (Sunny)
was willing to buy the home unit for
the price of RM450,000.
Three days later Sunny posted a letter
to Dann in which he agreed to buy the
home unit for the price set out in
Dann’s letter. After receiving Sunny’s
letter, Dann telephoned Sunny and told
him that he had decided that he want
to sell the home unit with different
price i.e RM500,000 due to his
financial constraint.
Sunny seeks your advice as to whether
he has a contract with Dann for the
sale of the home unit for the first price.
[10 marks]
ANSWER
ISSUE :
• The main issue in this case is whether sunny was having a valid contract with dann?
RULES :
• In discussing this issue, there are two relevant that can be applied to the case:
1) Section 11 – capacity to contract
2) Section 4 – communication of offer and acceptance
• In applying the case to the laws, section 4 is irrelevant to proceed with discussion since, in this case, section 11 is more
important in determining the status of the contract.
• Section 11 provide that, a person will be considered competent if he reach the age of majority, sound mind and not being
barred by laws.
APPLICATION:
• In applying this section to Sunny’s case, the first requirement affected sunny eligibility to have legal capacity to contract, ie
reaching the age of majority.
• It was stated in the scenario that, currently sunny is finishing his secondary schools.
• In Malaysia, the standard age for secondary schools are between 13 years old to 17 years old. This age range stil considered
minor. According to the age of majority act, the age considered majority would be 18 years old. In this age, a person is
considered independent and have legal right to proceed with contractual relationship as protected by laws in Malaysia.
• There are exception for minor to have legal capacity in contract, however its only limited to matters related to need and
necessities only. For instances scholarship for education.
CONCLUSION
-There is no contract between sunny and Dann. Therefore all the communication and revocstion made by Dann does not bring any
legal effect since form the start, sunny is a minor and not having a capacity to have contract with Dann at the first place.
• QUESTION 2
• Myra is a single mother. She
takes her daughter Hanna (a two
year old infant) to a local
playground. While lighting a
cigarette, Myra starts talking with
another young parent, Jane.
Myra is distracted by Jane's good
looks and gritty charm.
Meanwhile, Hanna starts to
wander over to the road.
• Jane notices a possible
catastrophe and rushes out after
Hanna. Jane just manages to save
Hanna from being run over by
Bob, who is driving a van within
the speed limit and quite safely.
However, Jane has too much
forward momentum and collides
with Bob's van. Jane is seriously
injured.
• You are required to discuss
whether Jane can sue Myra for
negligence.
• Answer
Issue :
Whether jane can sue myra for negligence?
Rule :
In determining this issue, it is very important to asess the liability of myra according to the test
of negligence according tort law.
According to tort law, there are 4 test that need to be examine;
1. Whether myra has a duty to hanna
2. Whether there is a breach of duty by myra
3. Whether there harm was cause by the breach of duty
Duty of care to someone will be evaluate by court by examine the status and the relatiobship
between the person taking consideration to the scenario of the case. A parent has duty of care
towards their children to ensure the safety, the same goes to a driver had duty to drive carefully
not to cause harm to other user on the road.
Application:
Examine element 1, 2, and 3
Injury was happened in the event jane make her move to save myra daughter for being knock
down by a van on the road nearby the playing ground.
All three element satisfied.
Conclusion :
Myra has duty of care to ensure the safety of hanna and she falied to observe it. Therefore, she
can be subject to liability for being sued by jane for damages.

• QUESTION 3
• Sally is a computer genius. One day, his
boyfriend, Matt request to Sally to help
him to access into his father’s phone in
order to get the password of his bank
account bank since his father had retained
the card and changed the password of his
account. Sally, with some special technics
managed to access into the phone and get
the new password of Matt bank account.
Sally also secretly block Matt’s father
access to Matt online account.
• Application:
• You are required to discuss whether Sally
can be considered liable for cybercrime
offence under computer CRIME ACT 1997.
• [10 marks]
•
• Answer
Issue :
Whether Sally can be liable for cybercrime offence for access into matt father’s phone?
Rule :
In determining this issue, it is very important to assess the liability of Sally according to computer crime act
1997. for criminal offence there are two basic requirement that is important to be identified before that person
can be subject to the offence. According to criminal law, there are 2 element that need to be examine and proof
beyond reasonable doubt;
1. Mens rea
2. actus reus
In cca 1997, it was stated that, there are several related offence that would bie applicable in unauthorized
activities to computer system such as section 3, section 4, section5 and 6. section 5 is relevant for discussion
since there was element of modification was made.
- Explain section 5.
Apply section 5 to sally;s scenario.
Mens rea : knowledge of sally of her deeds without the permission of matt’s father – the phone belong to
matt’s father
Actus reus : the access without permission and the modification for blocking activities – “term secretly block
matt’s father” show that clearly there was am modification had made to the phone coding.
-Justify your application.
Conclusion :
Sally is liable under section 5 computer crime act 1997. both requirement for actus reus and mens rea is
justified .