1. ) SYNERGY PROMENADE SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATO' ABDUL RAHMAN BIN SOLTAN 3. ) DATO' NORAINI BINTI SOLTAN v 1. ) THE NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS (MALAYSIA) BERHAD. 2. ) AHMAD SUHAEL ADNAN
Catchwords
Introduction 1. The Court in this case struck out the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants for defamation, under Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2012 ((“the Rules”), as it disclosed no cause of action. 2. Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules states as follows: 19. Striking out pleadings and endorsements (O. 18 r. 19) (1) The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any pleading or the endorsement, of any writ in the action, or anything in any pleading or in the endorsement, on the ground that- (a) it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence, as the case may be; (2) No evidence shall be admissible on an application under subparagraph (1)(a). Conclusion 17. The case law is clear that the summary procedure in Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules to strike out a claim can be applied in plain and obvious case. In the Court’s view this is one such plain and obvious case. 18. Further Order 34(1) of the Rules authorises the Court on its own motion to give such orders and directions: 19. Orders and directions for just, expeditious and economical disposal of proceedings (O. 34 r. 1) (1) Notwithstanding anything in these Rules, the Court may, at any time after the commencement of proceedings, of its own motion, direct any party or parties to the proceedings to appear before the Court, in order that the Court may make such order or give such direction as it thinks fit so that- all matters which must or can be dealt with on interlocutory applications and have not already been dealt with may so far as possible be dealt with; and (b) such directions may be given as to the future course of the action as appear best adapted to secure the just, expeditious and economical disposal thereof. 20. In the upshot the Court struck out the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants.
Practice Areas
Introduction 1. The Court in this case struck out the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants for defamation, under Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules of Court 2012 ((“the Rules”), as it disclosed no cause of action. 2. Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules states as follows: 19. Striking out pleadings and endorsements (O. 18 r. 19) (1) The Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any pleading or the endorsement, of any writ in the action, or anything in any pleading or in the endorsement, on the ground that- (a) it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence, as the case may be; (2) No evidence shall be admissible on an application under subparagraph (1)(a). Conclusion 17. The case law is clear that the summary procedure in Order 18 Rule 19 of the Rules to strike out a claim can be applied in plain and obvious case. In the Court’s view this is one such plain and obvious case. 18. Further Order 34(1) of the Rules authorises the Court on its own motion to give such orders and directions: 19. Orders and directions for just, expeditious and economical disposal of proceedings (O. 34 r. 1) (1) Notwithstanding anything in these Rules, the Court may, at any time after the commencement of proceedings, of its own motion, direct any party or parties to the proceedings to appear before the Court, in order that the Court may make such order or give such direction as it thinks fit so that- all matters which must or can be dealt with on interlocutory applications and have not already been dealt with may so far as possible be dealt with; and (b) such directions may be given as to the future course of the action as appear best adapted to secure the just, expeditious and economical disposal thereof. 20. In the upshot the Court struck out the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants.
Judges (1)
Case Significance
1. ) SYNERGY PROMENADE SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATO' ABDUL RAHMAN BIN SOLTAN 3. ) DATO... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated August 26, 2025 (citation: wa-23cy-22-04-2019). The case was decided by Akhtar bin Tahir.
Key issues: Introduction.
What was the outcome of 1. ) SYNERGY PROMENADE SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATO' ABDUL RAHMAN BIN SOLTAN 3. ) DATO...?
1. ) SYNERGY PROMENADE SDN. BHD. 2. ) DATO' ABDUL RAHMAN BIN SOLTAN 3. ) DATO... is a High Court decision dated August 26, 2025. The case was heard by Akhtar bin Tahir. See the full judgment for details.