ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — MALAYSIA
When the State
oversteps,
the law provides
a remedy.
We act for individuals, businesses, and organisations against decisions made by public authorities, statutory bodies, and tribunals through judicial review and beyond, wherever power has been used unlawfully, unreasonably, or unfairly.
What Is Administrative Law
The Law That
Governs Governance
Administrative law in Malaysia regulates how public authorities
ministries, statutory bodies, local councils, and tribunals
exercise their powers. It ensures that these bodies act within the
law and treat every person with fairness and due process.
Judicial Review
The High Court’s supervisory jurisdiction over public decision-makers. Any decision that is unlawful, irrational, or procedurally improper may be challenged. Malaysian courts apply principles derived from both English common law and domestic constitutional norms.
Legitimate Expectations
Where a public authority has made a clear and unambiguous representation by conduct or promise. The affected party may have a legally enforceable expectation that it will be honoured or properly reconsidered.
Natural Justice
Every person affected by a decision has the right to be heard (audi alteram partem) and the right to an unbiased decision-maker (nemo judex in causa sua). Violations of these principles render a decision voidable.
Ultra Vires Doctrine
A public body may only act within the powers granted to it by Parliament. Any action taken beyond those powers is void. This doctrine remains the cornerstone of administrative law accountability in Malaysia.
The Test
Grounds on which
a decision can be
challenged
Administrative law in Malaysia regulates how public authorities
ministries, statutory bodies, local councils, and tribunals
exercise their powers. It ensures that these bodies act within the
law and treat every person with fairness and due process.
Illegality
The decision-maker misunderstood or exceeded the law that gave it power to act, or used that power for a purpose it wasn’t granted for.
Irrationality
The decision is so unreasonable that no sensible authority, properly applying its mind, could have arrived at it.
Procedural Impropriety
You weren’t heard before the decision was made, or the process breached the rules of natural justice or a mandatory procedure.
Legitimate Expectation
An authority’s own promise, policy, or established practice was reversed without fair notice or good reason.
Order 53, Rules of Court 2012
The remedies
available under
judicial review
Five orders the High Court can grant against an unlawful exercise of public power.
Certiorari
Quashes a decision already made by a public body that acted outside its powers or unfairly.
Mandamus
Compels a public authority to perform a duty it is legally obliged to carry out.
Prohibition
Stops a body from proceeding with a decision or process that would be unlawful.
Quo Warranto
Challenges a person’s right to hold a public office or exercise a public function.
Declaration
Asks the Court to formally state what the legal position is, with or without an injunction.
How A Judicial Review Runs
From decision to
remedy
Time is critical, leave to apply must generally
be filed within three months of the decision.
Leave to commence
We assess merits and file the application for leave, supported by a statement and affidavit, promptly and within time.
Substantive hearing
Once leave is granted, we argue the full merits before the High Court, with the relevant record and authorities.
Remedy & enforcement
Where an order is granted, we follow through to ensure the public body actually complies with it.
Who We Act Against
Public bodies and
tribunals we
regularly appear
before
Local Authorities
Land Office
Public Service Commission
Professional & Licensing Bodies
Statutory Tribunals
Get Started
Think a public
decision
was made unlawfully?
Time is limited — let's talk.
Book a consultation and speak directly with an experienced advocate. We’ll listen, advise, and tell you exactly where you stand.
