IMPIAN SELAMA COMMUNICATION AND SERVICES SDN BHD v RAVINDRAN A/L RAJOO

Case Significance

Illustrates that an appellate court will not disturb a trial judge's findings after a full trial where the burden remained on the claimant, no evidence showed the works were unperformed, and no prima facie case of fraud was established.

This High Court decision, sitting in its appellate jurisdiction, concerns an appeal against a Sessions Court judgment that had dismissed a contractor's claim after a full trial. The appellant, Impian Selama Communication and Services Sdn Bhd, is a company engaged in construction, electrical, fibre-optic and telecommunication works and had been appointed a main contractor on projects for various principals. Between 2015 and July 2017 it engaged two enterprises to supply manpower and services for works at various sites, with the respondent being the project personnel associated with those entities. The appellant's suit, dismissed by the Sessions Court, was pursued on appeal. The questions before the High Court were whether the Sessions Court Judge had misdirected herself in law or fact, whether the evidence had been adequately evaluated, and whether a prima facie case of fraud had been established. The High Court held that the Sessions Court Judge had correctly appreciated the evidence and had not misdirected herself: this was a case decided after a full trial in which the judge saw and heard the witnesses and assessed their credibility, and her findings were supported by the evidence and were neither perverse nor against its weight. The court found that the legal burden remained on the appellant throughout, that no evidence had been adduced to show the works were not carried out, and that no prima facie case of fraud had been established, so the judge was entitled to decline drawing any adverse inference and to rely on the appellant's own approval and payment process. Finding no basis for appellate intervention, the court dismissed the appeal with costs of RM5,000.00 to the respondent, subject to allocatur. The judgment illustrates the restraint appellate courts show towards a trial judge's findings after a full trial, particularly on allegations of unperformed work and fraud.