MERU VALLEY RESORT BERHAD v 1. ) HU WEN SHIONG 2. ) TAN YOON YOKE

aa-12a-1-01-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 9 December 2024 • AA-12A-1-01/2024 • 18 min read
34 cases cited (0 SG, 34 foreign)

Outcome

In light of these findings, the appeal is allowed. The respondents' counterclaims are struck out in part only. Costs in the sum of420 RM5,000 is awarded to the appellant.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (aa-12a-1-01-2024). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure — Appeal — Jurisdiction of High Court — Whether Sessions Court erred in dismissing Appellant's application to strike out counterclaims under Order 33 Rules 2 and 5 of the Rules of Court 2012 — Whether appeal raises legal questions falling under exception in Section 28(1)(a) Courts of Judicature Act 1964 — Whether preliminary objections by Respondents are sustainable Tort — Defamation — Procedure — Whether Respondents failed to plead essential elements of defamation — Requirement to plead publication and reference to third parties — Whether failure to provide particulars renders counterclaim procedurally defective — Rules of Court 2012 O 78 r 3 Tort — Defamation — Counterclaim — Translation requirement — Whether failure to translate defamatory words into Bahasa Melayu with certified translation is fatal — Compliance with Article 152 Federal Constitution, Section 8 National Language Act 1963/67, and Order 92 Rule 1 Rules of Court 2012 Tort — Malicious prosecution — Counterclaim — Pleadings — Whether Respondents failed to plead malice, lack of reasonable cause, and favourable termination of proceedings — Whether procedural defects render counterclaim untenable d Civil Procedure — Counterclaim — Connection with principal claim — Whether Respondents' defamation and malicious prosecution counterclaims sufficiently connected to Appellant’s monetary claim — Whether counterclaims unnecessarily complicate proceedings and prolong trial Civil Procedure — Precedent — Doctrine of stare decisis — Whether Sessions Court bound by High Court's decision in Dr. Christian Jurgen Kaul v Meru Valley Resort [2013] 5 MLRH 173 — Whether gated and guarded community status precludes further litigation on maintenance obligations Civil Procedure — Abuse of process — Litigation strategy — Whether counterclaims were a misuse of court process to obstruct resolution of Appellant’s monetary claim — Whether counterclaims set unhealthy precedent undermining efficient legal recourse

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Defamation Tort

Judges (1)

Moses Susayan Delivered

Parties (3)

MERU VALLEY RESORT BERHAD Appellant Hu Wen Shiong Respondent Tan Yoon Yoke Respondent

Statutes Cited

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
Federal Constitution
Art 152
Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (34)

MY (34)
[1972] 1 MLJ 168 [1972] 1 MLRH 417 [1988] 1 CLJ 771 [1988] 2 MLJ 173 [1996] 2 MLRH 631 [1996] 3 AMR 3001 [1996] 3 CLJ 695 [1996] 3 MLJ 259 [1996] 3 MLRH 820 [1997] 5 MLJ 523 [2009] 3 AMR 377 [2009] 4 MLJ 833 [2009] MLJU 1093 [2010] 1 AMR 578 [2010] 1 CLJ 444 [2010] 2 MLJ 41 [2010] 6 CLJ 268 [2011] 5 CLJ 720285 [2013] 4 AMR 367 [2013] 5 MLRH 173 [2013] 6 CLJ 597 [2013] 9 MLJ 811 [2014] 1 MLRH 41 [2014] 9 MLJ 539 [2020] MLJU 1750 [2021] 5 MLJ 836 [2021] 7 CLJ 353 [2021] AMEJ 0681 [2022] 10 MLJ 800 [2022] 4 AMR 583 [2024] 6 MLRH 816 [2024] 9 CLJ 884 [2024] AMEJ 1603 [2024] MLJU 1667

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (aa-12a-1-01-2024)