Appeal
20 cases · December 2017 to August 2025
Case Volume by Year
1 17
1 19
18 25
2017–2025
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
interpretation of Clause 35A and Section 10 Schedule A — calculation of LAD — when the 42 month period begin for computation of the LAD — interpretation of contract — Court of Appeal already decided in similar cases — stare decisis — Appeal dismissed 3 Bankruptcy — Adjudication — Annulment of Bankruptcy Order — Application under Section 105, Insolvency Act 1967 — Whether non-filing of Statement of Affairs by Judgment Debtors fatal to annulment application — Whether director’s bankruptcy can be annulled upon settlement of Company’s EPF contributions — Section 46, Employees Provident Fund Act 1991 — Whether failure to satisfy Proofs of Debt filed before and after the annulment application affects the application. — Right of Judgment Creditor. 2 Tort — Trespass to land — Unregistered lease — Rights of the occupier of land against that of the registered proprietor — Whether there is an Agreement to Lease — Successor in title question — Whether management corporation is bound by the Agreement to Lease entered by Developer with third party — Whether this action is time-barred 2 O14 and O18 — application for summary judgment pursuant to Order 14 of the ROC and an application for striking out under Order 18 Rule 19 involve two different sets of principles, tests and burdens of proof. The facts of the case may be similar, as may the issues arising — I am of the opinion that consideration in an application for summary judgment is different from an application to strike out under O18. Therefore, the SCJ's reason, at paragraph 13 of his GOJ, is a misdirection of the law — appeal allowed. 1 Whether the Appellant had raised arguable and substantive issues regarding the non-compliance with the HP Act, section 4 1(b)(ii) and section 5(1) and whether the Appellant is entitled to reimbursement of the payment made under a void contract — section 4(1)(a) is applicable in this relationship between Appellant and Respondent, as the Appellant had signed the written statement in Part I of the Second Schedule as required under section 4(1)(a) of the HP Act — Appeal dismissed. 1 Prosecution’s appeal against sentence — Appellate restraint — No basis for interference 1 classification of document Order 34 Rule 2(2) — fraudulent misrepresentation — the Plaintiffs have proven the existence of fraudulent misrepresentation, and it is now, therefore, on the Defendant's shoulders to prove otherwise — appeal dismissed. 1 case was struck out due to failure to attend court on trial date — applied to reinstate — SCJ dismissed it — no application to set aside the order of the SCJ — Appellant has failed to provide any reasonable and convincing justification for his absence on the trial date that warrants the exercise of the Court's discretion in his favour — Appellant actually refused to attend the trial because he had not filed a witness statement and was unprepared to testify in Court as a witness in this case, rather than due to a mistaken date that is unsupported by any evidence — Appeal dismissed. 1 Claims by the insured against the insurer for the loss arising from the theft of the insured’s car — the Car was in the possession of a third party who had agreed to purchase the Car from the insured — the Car was stolen before full payment was made — whether the legal ownership remained with the insured — whether the insured has insurable interest over the Car under the insurance policy — the Court held that the insured continued to have insurable interest as the legal title to the car was never transferred to the third party — terms of the Agreement stipulates that the legal ownership would only be transferred upon full payment of the purchase price. Magistrate Court’s Decision was affirmed thus, appeal was dismissed. 1 Defamation — Whether the impugned words are defamatory or capable of bearing the pleaded defamatory imputations — Whether the ordinary reasonable person was likely to understand the impugned words in a defamatory way, under the circumstances in which the impugned words were published — Defence of Justification and fair comment 1 Meter tampering liability — Failure to change account holder name — Breach of obligation to do so in sale and purchase agreement — Whether vendor has the right of indemnity from purchaser to TNB claim for unrecorded electricity after completion of sale — Implied indemnity 1 Tort of abuse of process — Discontinuance of main action — Full trial on counterclaim — Whether trial judge erred in law and/or fact in determining that Plaintiff is liable for tort of abuse of process — Law on appellate intervention — Whether there is dominant collateral purpose for initiating the main action — Whether there is reasonable cause of action — Burden of proof — Circumstantial evidence — Presumption of adverse inference — Insufficient judicial appreciation of the evidence 1 Issues of whether the appellant was a beneficiary of shares of a company and whether the appellant was in breach of a Trust Deed in regard to the mode of payment towards the acquisition of the said shares which were registered in the name of the respondent — whether the appellant was entitled to enjoy the benefit of the dividends to the said shares immediately despite not having paid the full amount of his portion of the shared acquisition costs to the respondent. 1 Public Utilities — Proof of meter tampering — Admissibility of Part B documents without maker being called to testify — Section 73A of the Evidence Act 1950 — Proof of revenue loss — Statutory presumption under Section 38(4) of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 — Rebuttal evidence — No certificate of calibration for the Ammeter used — Backcharge is unjustified and unfair 1 Interpretation of Order 27 Rule 3 Rules of Court 2012 — Whether an admission made by the appellant to a third party can secure a final judgment for plaintiff’s claim — Whether the application — Appeal allowed 1 Coram — Quorum failure — Coram failure of the Bench of Federal Court — Court Judicature Act 1964 ss74 — Borneo judicial experience — Judge with Bornean experience — Violation of Article 128 of Federal Constitution — Federal Constitution Article 122,128 1
interpretation of Clause 35A and Section 10 Schedule A — calculation of LAD — when the 42 month period begin for computation of the LAD — interpretation of contract — Court of Appeal already decided in similar cases — stare decisis — Appeal dismissed 3 cases
ba-22ncvc-113-03-2023 Chen Boon Feng & 26 Others v PLATINUM EMINENT SDN BHD
23 February 2025
ba-11bncvc-21-07-2022 Icon City Development Sdn. Bhd. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI SIERRA PENINSULAR DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) v Ros Azlin Bin Sabawi
21 January 2025
ba-12bncvc-7-03-2022 Icon City Development Sdn. Bhd. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI SIERRA PENINSULAR DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) v 1. ) Philip Anthony a/l M Irdiahsamy 2. ) Annie a/p Joseph 3. ) Tan Kai Boon 4. ) Soo Huey Chiun 5. ) Lee Gim Hee 6. ) Tan Chin Poh 7. ) Lai Wai Mun 8. ) Kong Moi Cheng 9. ) Chew Swee Hoe 10. ) Chaw Lai Kit 11. ) Kong Kah Wai 12. ) Hiew Chee Faun 13. ) Yip Wai Teng 14. ) Wong Huey Shyan 15. ) Loh Wing Yew
21 January 2025
Bankruptcy — Adjudication — Annulment of Bankruptcy Order — Application under Section 105, Insolvency Act 1967 — Whether non-filing of Statement of Affairs by Judgment Debtors fatal to annulment application — Whether director’s bankruptcy can be annulled upon settlement of Company’s EPF contributions — Section 46, Employees Provident Fund Act 1991 — Whether failure to satisfy Proofs of Debt filed before and after the annulment application affects the application. — Right of Judgment Creditor. 2 cases
Tort — Trespass to land — Unregistered lease — Rights of the occupier of land against that of the registered proprietor — Whether there is an Agreement to Lease — Successor in title question — Whether management corporation is bound by the Agreement to Lease entered by Developer with third party — Whether this action is time-barred 2 cases
ba-12b-65-06-2024 SERAI SAUJANA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v 1. ) SERAI SAUJANA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 2. ) MANAGEMENT CORPORATION OF THE VILLA @ SERAI SAUJANA 3. ) TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD
12 May 2025
ba-12b-75-07-2024 TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD v 1. ) Serai Saujana Development Sdn Bhd 2. ) SAUJANA RESORT (M) BERHAD
12 May 2025
O14 and O18 — application for summary judgment pursuant to Order 14 of the ROC and an application for striking out under Order 18 Rule 19 involve two different sets of principles, tests and burdens of proof. The facts of the case may be similar, as may the issues arising — I am of the opinion that consideration in an application for summary judgment is different from an application to strike out under O18. Therefore, the SCJ's reason, at paragraph 13 of his GOJ, is a misdirection of the law — appeal allowed. 1 case
Whether the Appellant had raised arguable and substantive issues regarding the non-compliance with the HP Act, section 4 1(b)(ii) and section 5(1) and whether the Appellant is entitled to reimbursement of the payment made under a void contract — section 4(1)(a) is applicable in this relationship between Appellant and Respondent, as the Appellant had signed the written statement in Part I of the Second Schedule as required under section 4(1)(a) of the HP Act — Appeal dismissed. 1 case
Prosecution’s appeal against sentence — Appellate restraint — No basis for interference 1 case
classification of document Order 34 Rule 2(2) — fraudulent misrepresentation — the Plaintiffs have proven the existence of fraudulent misrepresentation, and it is now, therefore, on the Defendant's shoulders to prove otherwise — appeal dismissed. 1 case
case was struck out due to failure to attend court on trial date — applied to reinstate — SCJ dismissed it — no application to set aside the order of the SCJ — Appellant has failed to provide any reasonable and convincing justification for his absence on the trial date that warrants the exercise of the Court's discretion in his favour — Appellant actually refused to attend the trial because he had not filed a witness statement and was unprepared to testify in Court as a witness in this case, rather than due to a mistaken date that is unsupported by any evidence — Appeal dismissed. 1 case
Claims by the insured against the insurer for the loss arising from the theft of the insured’s car — the Car was in the possession of a third party who had agreed to purchase the Car from the insured — the Car was stolen before full payment was made — whether the legal ownership remained with the insured — whether the insured has insurable interest over the Car under the insurance policy — the Court held that the insured continued to have insurable interest as the legal title to the car was never transferred to the third party — terms of the Agreement stipulates that the legal ownership would only be transferred upon full payment of the purchase price. Magistrate Court’s Decision was affirmed thus, appeal was dismissed. 1 case
Defamation — Whether the impugned words are defamatory or capable of bearing the pleaded defamatory imputations — Whether the ordinary reasonable person was likely to understand the impugned words in a defamatory way, under the circumstances in which the impugned words were published — Defence of Justification and fair comment 1 case
Meter tampering liability — Failure to change account holder name — Breach of obligation to do so in sale and purchase agreement — Whether vendor has the right of indemnity from purchaser to TNB claim for unrecorded electricity after completion of sale — Implied indemnity 1 case
Tort of abuse of process — Discontinuance of main action — Full trial on counterclaim — Whether trial judge erred in law and/or fact in determining that Plaintiff is liable for tort of abuse of process — Law on appellate intervention — Whether there is dominant collateral purpose for initiating the main action — Whether there is reasonable cause of action — Burden of proof — Circumstantial evidence — Presumption of adverse inference — Insufficient judicial appreciation of the evidence 1 case
Public Utilities — Proof of meter tampering — Admissibility of Part B documents without maker being called to testify — Section 73A of the Evidence Act 1950 — Proof of revenue loss — Statutory presumption under Section 38(4) of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 — Rebuttal evidence — No certificate of calibration for the Ammeter used — Backcharge is unjustified and unfair 1 case
Interpretation of Order 27 Rule 3 Rules of Court 2012 — Whether an admission made by the appellant to a third party can secure a final judgment for plaintiff’s claim — Whether the application — Appeal allowed 1 case
Coram — Quorum failure — Coram failure of the Bench of Federal Court — Court Judicature Act 1964 ss74 — Borneo judicial experience — Judge with Bornean experience — Violation of Article 128 of Federal Constitution — Federal Constitution Article 122,128 1 case
Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Top Firms
Cases
ba-12ancvc-59-11-2024
ARMANEE CONDOMINIUM JOINT MANAGEMENT BODY v BURGESS RAWSON MANAGEMENT SDN BHD
21 August 2025
MYHC
ba-12ancc-25-11-2024
PAUL RAJ A/L DAVIS v MERCEDES-BENZ SERVICES MALAYSIA SDN. BHD.
18 August 2025
MYHC
ca-45b-4-11-2022
PENDAKWA RAYA Pendakwa Raya TERTUDUH Mohd Noor Bin Ab Manap
18 August 2025
MYHC
j-03im-53-07-2023
Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja v HAI KIONG NIANG PIHAK KETIGA Jabatan Insolvensi Malaysia
10 July 2025
MYCOA
j-03im-57-08-2023
Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja v HAI CHIA LING
10 July 2025
MYCOA
ba-12bncvc-43-07-2024
Lim Yeow Hon v 1. ) Chu Voon Khar 2. ) Wang Lup Meng 3. ) Low Jian Shin 4. ) Lim Derk Leon 5. ) Oon Min Chuan
30 June 2025
MYHC
ba-12ancvc-63-11-2024
EDWIN TEOH JIT SIONG v PLENTIFIELD MARKETING SDN.BHD.
17 June 2025
MYHC
wa-11bncc-6-08-2024
MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD v 1. ) SUPPIAH A/L MARIAPPEN (Berniaga atas nama SVE Enterprise) 2. ) ECNISVARAN A/L SUKUMARAN
19 May 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-65-06-2024
SERAI SAUJANA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v 1. ) SERAI SAUJANA DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 2. ) MANAGEMENT CORPORATION OF THE VILLA @ SERAI SAUJANA 3. ) TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD
12 May 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-75-07-2024
TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD v 1. ) Serai Saujana Development Sdn Bhd 2. ) SAUJANA RESORT (M) BERHAD
12 May 2025
MYHC
ba-12bcy-7-10-2024
DATIN PADUKA CHE ASMAH IBRAHIM v Kamarul Zaman Bin Haji Yusoff
24 April 2025
MYHC
ba-12bncvc-65-10-2024
LAW SONG TING v 1. ) TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD 2. ) HLK (CHAIN-STORE) ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES SDN BHD 3. ) AFFINITY DESIGNS SDN BHD
6 April 2025
MYHC
ba-22ncvc-113-03-2023
Chen Boon Feng & 26 Others v PLATINUM EMINENT SDN BHD
23 February 2025
MYHC
ba-11bncvc-21-07-2022
Icon City Development Sdn. Bhd. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI SIERRA PENINSULAR DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) v Ros Azlin Bin Sabawi
21 January 2025
MYHC
ba-12bncvc-7-03-2022
Icon City Development Sdn. Bhd. (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI SIERRA PENINSULAR DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD) v 1. ) Philip Anthony a/l M Irdiahsamy 2. ) Annie a/p Joseph 3. ) Tan Kai Boon 4. ) Soo Huey Chiun 5. ) Lee Gim Hee 6. ) Tan Chin Poh 7. ) Lai Wai Mun 8. ) Kong Moi Cheng 9. ) Chew Swee Hoe 10. ) Chaw Lai Kit 11. ) Kong Kah Wai 12. ) Hiew Chee Faun 13. ) Yip Wai Teng 14. ) Wong Huey Shyan 15. ) Loh Wing Yew
21 January 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-53-06-2024
K SENG SENG CORPORATION BERHAD v TAN LIAN CHOON
14 January 2025
MYHC
b-02ncvcw-2083-11-2022
ONG KWEE LEE v ABLE PERFECT SDN BHD
13 January 2025
MYCOA
ba-12bncvc-45-10-2023
GREENERY PARTNERS & NETWORKS SDN BHD v Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)
13 January 2025
MYHC
a-02imncvc-191-01-2019
1. KAWAN LAMA BUILDERS SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 1167936-P) 2. TENG CHEE LAY (NO. K/P: 760721-02-5307) v SYARIKAT LUMUT QUARRY SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 21166-D) PIHAK KETIGA JJM INTEGRATED SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 322255-W)
5 August 2019
MYCOA
01f-22-10-2014q
1. ) Keruntum Sdn Bhd 2. ) Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, Colin Lau & David Yu v 1. ) 1. The Director of Forest 2. The Minister of Resources Planning 3. The Government of the State of Sarawak 2. ) Datuk Foong Joo Chung & Lonie Anak Pindda
6 December 2017
MYFC