XXXX v PROTASCO BHD
w-02nccw-1459-09-2023 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 8 March 2026 • W-02(NCC)(W)-1459-09/2023 • 42 min read
7 cases cited
(0 SG, 7 foreign)
Outcome
For the above reasons, we unanimously dismiss the appeal of the appellants wholly with costs of RM150,000.00 in favour of the Protasco. [83] As for the cross-appeal of Protasco for the failure of the learned trial judge decision not to award exemplary and aggravated damages, we see no reason to interfere with her discretion. The cross-appeal of Protasco is unanimously dismissed with no order as to costs.
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (3)
Counsel (12)
B H Lawrence & Co. Firm Cheah Teh & Su Firm C. Vignesh Kumar Counsel Appellant Chen Jia Ern Counsel Appellant Dato' Malik Imtiaz Sarwar Counsel Appellant How Chen Hee Counsel Respondent Joycelyn Teoh Counsel Respondent Lim Yvonne Counsel Appellant Peter Skelchy Counsel Respondent R. Jayasingam Counsel Appellant Rubanyah Sedopathy Counsel Appellant Tan Zhixin Counsel Respondent
Parties (1)
Statutes Cited
Companies Act 1965 (Cap 777)
Court of Judicature Act 1964
s 3 s 71
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 593)
Rules of Court 2012
Cases Cited (7)
MY (7)
[1972] 1 MLJ 153 [1996] 3 CLJ 335 [2010] 9 CLJ 625 [2014] 7 MLJ 652 [2017] 5 CLJ 418 [2020] 12 MLJ 67 [2023] 3 MLJ 795
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (w-02nccw-1459-09-2023)