Yeong Oon Kong v Lau Teck Poh & Ors

Court of Appeal · · Constitutional & Administrative Law

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This digest provides AI-generated summaries of recent Malaysian legal judgments and is provided for general informational purposes only. The digest may contain errors, omissions, or inaccuracies, and does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. For complete and authoritative information, always consult a qualified legal professional and refer to official court sources (here) or the full text of original judgments. The providers of this digest accept no responsibility or liability for any loss and/or damage resulting from reliance on its contents.

Yeong Oon Kong v Lau Teck Poh & Ors
CourtCourt of Appeal
Judgment Date16 March 2026
Date Uploaded18 March 2026
Legal TopicsConstitutional & Administrative Law
Parties

Appellant(s): Yeong Oon Kong

Respondent(s):

  • Xxxx
  • Chen Kuan Kuan
  • Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan Malaysia
  • Pendaftar Pelesenan Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan Malaysia
Bench
  • Dato' Dr. Choo Kah Sing
  • YA Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng
  • YA Dato' Sri Latifah Binti Haji Mohd Tahar
Facts & Background
  • The 1st respondent acquired three vehicle registration numbers, including "AQ", which were registered in his name by the Road Transport Department (JPJ) in December 2012.
  • Following an MACC investigation, the JPJ cancelled the registration of "AQ" in the 1st respondent's name in 2013 without affording a hearing, prompting the 1st and 2nd respondents to initiate judicial review proceedings.
  • While the judicial review was pending, the appellant registered "AQ" in his name in 2016, leading to competing claims over the number, which the Court of Appeal remitted to the High Court for determination.
Issues for the Court
  • Whether the High Court correctly applied the nullity principle in quashing the cancellation of the registration number "AQ" in the 1st respondent's name.
  • Whether the original applicants for judicial review had correctly invoked the relevant statutory provision and identified the final administrative decision for challenge.
  • Whether the "Second Actor Theory" should apply to validate the appellant's 2016 registration of "AQ", given the subsequent declaration of unlawfulness of the earlier cancellation.
Decision
  • The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's decision, and declared the appellant as the rightful owner of the vehicle registration number "AQ".
  • The Court found that the High Court erred by overemphasizing the retroactive effect of the certiorari order, overlooking that the 2013 cancellation, though later quashed, was a subsisting factual act capable of legal consequences until formally set aside.
  • Applying the "Second Actor Theory", the Court held that the 2016 registration of "AQ" to the appellant by the JPJ was valid, as the JPJ (the "Second Actor") relied on the extant, albeit later invalidated, cancellation of the 1st respondent's registration.
Link to JudgmentView Full Judgment

Related judgments

📬 Found this useful?

Get daily AI-generated summaries of Malaysian legal judgments from the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal straight to your inbox, free!