Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

ADMIRALTY LAW– SIGNIFICANCE OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA (UNCLOS)

UNCLOS (1982 Dec. 10) 1833 U.N.T.S. 397

Purpose of the UNCLOS and has it been ratified by Malaysia?
1. Establishing a legal order for the Seas and oceans with the aim of:
– Spurring international communication on maritime fronts between states.
– Promoting peaceful use of the seas and oceans.
– Conserving the living resources and the marine environment.

2. Malaysia ratified UNCLOS on the 14th of October 1996 as a state party Malaysia has always and continues to implement into practice various provisions under UNCLOS 1982.

What is the significance of UNCLOS 1982 in Malaysia?

  • Malaysia is strategically located between the South China Sea and the straits of Malacca and Singapore, it is one of the most important waterways connecting the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, the growing presence of the Straits in international trade poses evolving challenges. UNCLOS 1982 ensures the economic viability and sustainability of the ecosystem along the abovementioned shipping channels are preserved.

What are the measures under UNCLOS 1982 practiced by Malaysia?

  • Malaysia practices the Traffic Separation Scheme, prescribed under UNCLOS 1982 to ensure safe passage through the Straits, this eases international navigation for ships through the straits.
  • UNCLOS 1982 also provides cooperative arrangements between states as a method to strengthen communication.
  • The cooperation aids in the preservation of marine environment. For instance, states may establish requirements to reduce and control pollution to allow the entry of foreign vessels into their ports.
  • The mechanism also acts as a platform for companies and other stakeholders of the shipping industry to actively contribute towards efforts to maintain and improve safety of navigation and preservation of biodiversity in the shipping channels.

What are the current maritime co-operations pursued by Malaysia?

  • Malaysia promotes cooperation in maritime security through the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) through forums such as the ASEAN Maritime forum.
  • Malaysia alongside Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand formed the Malacca Straits Coordinated Patrols they pursue activities to maintain the security in the Straits of Malacca.
  • Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines share an avenue under the Trilateral Cooperative Arrangement with the aim of meeting common goals such as strengthening maritime security in the Sulu and Sulawesi Seas.
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

STRATA MANAGEMENT – MANAGEMENT FEE SHOWDOWN – RESIDENTIAL VS. COMMERCIAL – WHO’S PAYING FOR THE EXTRAS?

In a landmark decision in Aikbee Timbers Sdn Bhd & Anor v Yii Sing Chiu & Anor and another appeal [2024] 1 MLJ 94 , the Court of Appeal clarified the rules on maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions in mixed strata developments. Developers and management corporations can impose different rates based on the distinct purposes of residential and commercial parcels. The judgment emphasizes fairness, ensuring residential owners bear the costs of exclusive facilities like pools and gyms, while commercial owners aren’t subsidizing amenities they don’t use. This ruling highlights the importance of transparency in budgeting and equitable cost-sharing in mixed-use properties.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

ILLEGALITY OF UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS’ CLAIM – FINDER’S FEES AND ILLEGALITY: COURT DRAWS THE LINE ON UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS

In a pivotal ruling, the Court of Appeal clarified that finder’s fee agreements are not automatically void under the Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981. The Court emphasized that illegality must be specifically pleaded and supported by evidence, and isolated transactions do not trigger the Act’s prohibition. This decision highlights the importance of precise pleadings and a clear understanding of the law’s scope.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES ACT – OPPRESSION – DRAWING THE LINE: FEDERAL COURT DEFINES OPPRESSION VS. CORPORATE HARMS

In a decisive ruling, the Federal Court clarified the boundaries between personal shareholder oppression and corporate harm, overturning the Court of Appeal’s findings. The Court held that claims tied to the wrongful transfer of trademarks belonged to the company, not the individual shareholder, reaffirming that corporate harm must be addressed through a derivative action rather than an oppression claim.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES LAW – WHEN DIRECTORS BETRAY: COURT CONDEMNS BREACH OF TRUST AND CORPORATE MISCONDUCT

In a stark reminder of the consequences of corporate betrayal, the court found that the directors had systematically dismantled their own company to benefit a competing entity they controlled. By breaching their fiduciary duties, conspiring to harm the business, and unjustly enriching themselves, the defendants were held accountable through significant compensatory and exemplary damages, reaffirming the critical importance of trust and integrity in corporate governance.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »
17 11 月 ,2024 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们