KUALA LUMPUR (Dec 23): The High Court on Tuesday has granted an ad-interim stay (temporary pause) of a policy imposed by the government on private clinics requiring them to display the prices of their medicines at their premises by Jan 1, 2026.
The ad-interim stay was granted by High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching until the Feb 4 hearing of the doctors challenging the regulations for a stay of the requirement by the Health Ministry and the Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry and government imposition of the rule.
Initially, Tuesday was fixed for the hearing of the doctors’ stay application, but this was opposed by the Attorney General’s Chambers — represented by senior federal counsel (SFC) Azmi Aman — where the two ministries and the government indicated that they are opposing the stay application and were ready to implement the regulations requiring clinics to display their medical process by Jan 1.
Azmi had informed the court that the ministries and the government had filed an affidavit in reply in opposition to the stay on Monday (Dec 22), where, among others, in its inspection of more than 2,000 private clinics nationwide, 89.9% of them had seen a compliance of the regulations.
“Following that, the AG’s Chambers has received instructions to oppose this stay application,” the SFC said.
On Oct 22, Loke had granted leave (permission) to the group of doctors challenging the regulations and requirement set by the two ministries to display their medicine prices by Jan 1, 2026, and following that, a moratorium was in place to delay its implementation.
The hearing of the merits of the application had been fixed for case management on Jan 19.
The two ministries want to enforce the mandatory display of medicine prices across all private healthcare facilities — including private clinics, aesthetic clinics, and community pharmacies — from 2026. This initiative is part of the government's efforts to improve public access to drug price information.
In their application, the doctors sought a certiorari — an order from a higher court — to quash the order issued by the Domestic Trade Ministry on April 24 this year, that requires healthcare facilities to display the prices.
Alternatively, they sought a certiorari to quash the controversial government directive as it applies to private entities.
They further sought a declaration that the controversial directive from the Domestic Trade Ministry is defective on the grounds that it is not valid in law, disproportionate, and not logical in terms of procedure.
As a final alternative, they want a declaration that the Domestic Trade Ministry's order is not applicable to private healthcare, medical practitioners, and dentists. They also sought a stay of the requirement, pending the termination or disposal of their application.
Need time to reply to government’s affidavit filed on Monday
However, senior counsel Datuk Dr Gurdial Singh Nijar and Abraham Au, who are representing eight different medical associations, and K Shanmuga representing two different medical associations said that as the affidavit and opposition to the application had only been filed on Monday, they needed time to reply to it.
Shanmuga said the 2,000 clinics cited only represent a small portion of clinics nationwide, and they have to seek instructions following the voluminous affidavits filed last week and the opposition of the stay this week.
Furthermore, Shanmuga said the government should extend the moratorium to delay the implementation, as this court had in October granted leave to doctors to hear the merits of their challenge to the regulations.
“For these reasons, an ad-interim stay should be given to maintain the status quo,” he added.
Gurdial agreed with Shanmuga that the matter should remain status quo and the moratorium for clinics to display prices of their medicines be extended until the hearing of the stay application.
He cited the experience of representing doctors who had prescribed Ivermectin as a measure to counter Covid-19 during the epidemic, where action was taken by the Health Ministry against them for prescribing the medication.
“Some doctors who prescribed Ivermectin were penalised by the ministry and were fined between RM5,000 and RM10,000 by the ministry when there is a challenge against the directive.
“The Federal Court then ruled that doctors are free to prescribe medicines, including Ivermectin, but there are doctors who had already paid the fine and cannot recover the amount. In light of this, if the regulation requiring clinics to display the prices of their medicine is enforced on Jan 1, and clinics are penalised for not doing so, and later the challenge by these clinics is successful, it may defeat the purpose of implementing it,” he argued.
Gurdial said for these reasons, a temporary stay or an ad-interim stay is needed to be granted before the proper hearing and also the hearing of the merits of the judicial review.
Following this, Loke decided to grant the ad-interim stay and fixed Feb 4 for the hearing of the doctors’ application for a stay and the opposition by the government.
The judge directed the doctors to file their reply by Jan 19, and ordered them to file their written submissions by Jan 26, as the hearing is fixed for Feb 4.
Gurdial and Au are representing Malaysian Medical Association and a group of seven other doctors and clinics, while Shanmuga appeared for Persatuan Pengamal Perubatan Swasta Selangor dan Kuala Lumpur (through its officer Dr Chang Chee Seong) and Medipulse Healthcare Sdn Bhd.