http://dspace.fsktm.um.edu.my/handle/1812/406 Search the Channel search http://dspace.fsktm.um.edu.my/simple-search http://dspace.fsktm.um.edu.my/handle/1812/612 Title: The doctrine of privity in Malaysia: the need for reform and the way forward <br/> <br/>Authors: Tan, Pei Meng <br/> <br/>Abstract: ABSTRACT This thesis examines the doctrine of privity in Malaysia and argues that its application to contracts made for the benefit of third parties is inadequate and requires statutory reform. The main obstacle of this doctrine is that it frustrates the contracting parties’ intention to benefit third parties. The difficulty is exacerbated by the growth of contracts made for the benefit of third parties in recent years. It is submitted that contract theory can accommodate third party rights. The development of common law mechanisms to overcome the doctrine of privity in England, Australia and Canada are analysed to consider their application to the position in Malaysia. The common law mechanisms discussed include promisee’s remedies for breach of contract and mechanisms which grant direct rights to the third party to enforce a contract such as trust, agency, tort, Himalaya clauses and others. A comparative study of the use of these mechanisms in the jurisdictions analysed shows that a number of important judicial developments can be undertaken by the Malaysian courts. However, this study also shows that there are limitations with judicial reform of the doctrine of privity and that the more effective solution is through statutory reform. For this purpose, a study on the statutory development of third party rights in England, New Zealand, Australia, together with the position in the United States and the Principles of European Contract Law which are applicable to members of the European Union is also included in this discussion. This comparative study shows that the framework adopted in England now found in Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 is the preferred model for reform subject to a few changes to suit local conditions and circumstances. ABSTRAK Tesis ini mengkaji aplikasi doktrin priviti di Malaysia and menghujahkan bahawa aplikasi doktrin ini kepada kontrak untuk faedah parti ketiga adalah bermasalah and memerlukan ‘statutory reform’. Masalah utama doktrin ini adalah ia tidak dapat memenuhi hasrat parti-parti berkontrak untuk memberi faedah kepada parti ketiga. Masalah ini menjadi lebih rumit disebabkan oleh perkembangan kontrak untuk faedah parti ketiga sejak tahun-tahun kebelakangan ini. Tesis ini mempertikaikan bahawa hak parti ketiga dalam kontrak boleh wujud di dalam teori kontrak. Perkembangan mekanisme dalam ‘common law’ untuk mengelakkan doktrin priviti di England, Australia dan Kanada juga dikaji untuk mempertimbangkan kemungkinan aplikasi mekanisme ini di Malaysia. Mekanisme yang dibincangkan termasuk agensi, amanah, tort, remedi-remedi kemungkiran kontrak dan lain-lain lagi. Kajian mekanisme ini menunjukkan bahawa terdapat banyak perkembangan yang boleh dipertimbangkan untuk diaplikasikan di Malaysia. Akan tetapi, kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa terdapat kelemahan dalam mekanisme ‘common law’ untuk memyelesaikan masalah doktrin priviti. Jalan penyelesaian yang lebih berkesan adalah melalui ‘statutory reform’. Oleh itu, kajian ini juga meliputi perbandingan ‘statutory reform’ untuk doktrin priviti di England, New Zealand dan Australia serta dengan perkembangan di Amerika Syarikat dan ‘Principles of European Contract Law’ yang digunakan oleh ahli-ahli ‘European Union’. Kajian perbandingan ini menunjukkan bahawa ‘statutory reform’ di England melalui ‘Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999’ yang terpilih untuk Malaysia tertakluk kepada beberapa perubahan supaya pembaruan undang-undang mengenai doktrin priviti di Malaysia adalah bersesuian dengan keadaan di Malaysia. <br/> <br/>Description: Thesis (PhD) -- Faculty of Law, University of Malaya, 2009. http://dspace.fsktm.um.edu.my/handle/1812/407 Title: Settlement of Election Offences in Four Southeast Asian Countries (with Special Reference to the Indonesian General Elections) <br/> <br/>Authors: Topo Santoso <br/> <br/>Abstract: The aim of this research is to analyse the legal framework in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines, and its conformity to international instruments regarding general elections, particularly on settlement of election offences for the conduct of democratic general elections. To achieve the purpose of this study, there will be a need to examine (i) The extent the legal framework in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines incorporated international standards on election to protect election process from election offences; (ii) The extent the election offences are settled through the criminal process and through the process of election petition. It is highly important to conduct a more comprehensive research, either globally or regionally, to identify some problems related to settlement of election offences, either through the criminal process or through the election petition process. By means of this research, the differences and similarities of the legal framework as well as their strengths and weaknesses can be found and some recommendations could be proposed to strengthen the system of election offence settlement. This study is a comparative study. The methodology applied in this thesis is related to the objective, namely, to analyse the legal framework of Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines in solving election offences problems. This thesis analyses the extent to which the legal framework incorporates several international standards concerning elections. The primary data of this thesis are documents in the form of laws, legislation and court decisions. It is supported by other literature, such as reports, academic journals, magazines, ii newspapers, and books. Additionally, interviews were also conducted with several resource persons having expertise in this field. The data are analysed using a qualitative approach. The study results demonstrate that in order to prevent unwanted political influence on the election process , every country needs a legal framework that protect general elections from all kinds of election offences, provide the right of all aggrieved parties to challenge the elections result before an independent and competent judicial body and set out the scope of available review, establish provisions concerning the effect of irregularities on the outcome of elections, and provide effective and fair redress mechanism. The existing legal framework of the respective countries generally cover elements of international human right standards on election, however different on some issues, especially the coverage of election offences, the model of regulation, the effect of election offences on the election result, the ground of election petitions and the settlement procedure (in criminal process and in election petition). Some aspects of the legal framework of settlement of election offences, particularly in Indonesia, need to be improved to ensure more democratic general elections. It is extremely important for a democratic country to protect its political process and protect political rights of every citizen and parties from election offences. Without an effective and fair system, it will be very difficult to achieve the protection as provided in international standards. The international standards provide a minimum benchmark to which all countries should aspire <br/> <br/>Description: A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) in the University of Malaya