Tort
24 cases · October 2017 to January 2026
Case Volume by Year
1 17
1 18
1 20
1 21
19 25
1 26
2017–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Kecuaian — Treler muatan luar biasa — Muatan melintang laluan — Tiada lampu amaran — Permit tidak sah — Kegagalan SOP eskot — Prima facie kecuaian — Tanggungjawab lebih tinggi kenderaan berat — Pembahagian liabiliti. Keterangan — Percanggahan saksi — Kebolehpercayaan — Pembayaran saman sebagai pengakuan sokongan. Undang-undang Trafik — Pelanggaran Kaedah 16 Kaedah Lalu Lintas 1959 — Amalan keselamatan muatan besar. Ganti Rugi — Penilaian kuantum — Garis panduan — Kecederaan otak serius — Kos penjagaan masa hadapan — Tiada asas menaikkan kuantum. Prosedur — Rayuan & rayuan silang — Standard campur tangan — Liabiliti diselaraskan 90:10. 2 Kemalangan jalan raya — Beban pembuktian — Akta Keterangan 1950 ss 101–102 — Kegagalan plaintif membuktikan penglibatan defendan — Percanggahan keterangan — Dokumen kontemporari — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan — Prinsip plainly wrong — Insufficient judicial appreciation of evidence — Kuantum — Taksiran gantirugi bersyarat — Tiada liabiliti — Insurans motor — Rayuan balas penanggung insurans — Remedi deklaratori — Isu akademik — Tiada keperluan deklarasi — Rayuan ditolak — Kos dalam kos 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Road maintenance contractor — Plastic cone on road shoulder — Whether contractor negligent — Burden of proof — Balance of probabilities — Evidence Act 1950, s 101 Evidence — Evaluation — Conflicting versions — Police reports lodged belatedly — Police reports lodged on same date using similar language — Whether reports orchestrated by third party — Credibility and probative value — Investigating officer’s conclusion based on presumption — Hearsay evidence — Medical records Appeal — Findings of fact — Trial judge’s failure to judicially appreciate evidence — Undue reliance on police reports — Whether findings plainly wrong — Appellate intervention— “Plainly wrong” test 1 malicious prosecution — prosecutorial authority — no unfettered discretion — no basis for immunity from private action — elements of the tort of malicious prosecution — presumption of legality and deference — malice as a separate element — Article 145(3) Federal Constitution 1 Negligence — Duty of care — Contractor carrying out excavation works — Damage to underground cables belonging to utility company — Whether contractor exercised reasonable diligence 1 professional negligence suit commenced by a bank against a property/estate valuer for overvaluing a property resulting a loss to the bank 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Motorcycle colliding with rear left side of car — Whether trial court erred in fixing 100% liability on motorcyclist — Failure of driver to signal before changing lane — Sudden lateral movement — Physical damage pattern corroborating plaintiff’s version — Investigating officer’s independent evidence — Sessions Court’s misdirection — Contributory negligence — Apportionment of liability — Whether 70:30 apportionment justified. 1 Misfeasance in public office — Elements of the tort — Abuse of public power by a public officer with targeted malice or reckless indifference to the probability of harm — Failure to prove bad faith, ill-will, or intention to injure — Public officer acting in accordance with official procedure and existing laws — Tort not established. 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Damages — Appeal against quantum — Personal injuries — Fractured clavicle with severe complications — Multiple surgical interventions — Wound dehiscence — Permanent functional impairment — Scarring — Future medical expenses — Shoulder brace — Neuropathic pain medication — Contributory negligence — Whether awards manifestly excessive — Whether awards supported by medical evidence — Principles of appellate intervention — Comparable authorities — Compendium as guideline — Application of legal principles to assessment of general and special damages — Cross-appeal for enhancement of damages and additional claim for spinal injury — Burden of proving causation — Whether claim for spinal injury established on balance of probabilities — Appeal allowed in part, cross-appeal allowed in part. 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Liability not in issue — Appeal on quantum Damages — Assessment — Loss of consciousness — Mild traumatic brain injury — Modest enhancement Damages — Assessment — Shoulder impingement — Functional limitation — Award enhanced Damages — Special damages — Physiotherapy — Strict proof — Award affirmed Damages — Future medical expenses — Arcoxia — Speculative claim — Duty to mitigate — Claim dismissed Appeal — Appellate restraint — Limited interference with quantum 1 Conspiracy to injure — Unlawful means conspiracy — Elements to prove — Combination, intention to injure, unlawful acts, resultant loss — Suspicious sequence of events insufficient — Evidence falling short of proving concerted agreement on balance of probabilities — Distinction between commercial opportunism and targeted conspiracy 1 Conspiracy (unlawful means) — Elements — Agreement — Intention to injure — Overt acts — Damage — Strict pleading requirements — Familial relationship — Whether sufficient to infer conspiracy Pleading — Fraud and dishonesty — Strict particularisation — General allegations insufficient — Inference versus fact — Failure to plead dishonesty, assistance and causal link 1 Vicarious liability — Whether landlord can be held vicariously liable for acts of tenant — Applicability of close connection test — Whether landlord-tenant relationship sufficient to impose liability 1 Conspiracy — Conspiracy to injure — Elements of conspiracy — Requirement of knowledge and intent for co-signatory of cheques 1 Negligence — Prison authority — Death in custody — Suicide — No foreseeable risk — No liability — Appeal dismissed 1 negligence — vehicle chassis number tempered with — what is the standard of reasonable care of PUSPAKOM in inspecting the car — whether PUSPAKOM ought to carry out tests beyond visual inspection. 1 Defamation — Libel — Allegation of defamatory posts and article — Whether the publications referred to the Plaintiffs — Whether the publications lead reasonable people who know the Plaintiffs to the conclusion that the Publications refer to them — Whether the publication is capable of bearing the pleaded imputations — Defective pleading — Whether defendants succeeded in proving defences of justification and fair comment 1 Negligence — Road accident — Respondent involved in an accident with the deceased’s motorcycle — Dependency claim by deceased's spouse and children — Whether appellants discharged burden of showing negligence — Whether court should attach any weight to IO's opinion 1 Negligence — Duty of care — Pregnancy in workplace — Employer’s duty to assess occupational risks upon disclosure of pregnancy — Failure to conduct risk assessment under Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (OSHA) — Whether statutory duty breached — Whether light duty unjustifiably denied despite oral request — Whether internal policy requiring written application too rigid — Duty of proactive response under OSHA sections 15 and 16 — Whether breach of duty materially increased risk of miscarriage. TORT — Negligence — Causation — Link between employer’s omissions and miscarriage — Application of ‘material contribution’ test — ‘But for’ test inapplicable where multiple contributing factors — Expert evidence supports workplace stress as material contributor — Trifling contributions excluded — Legal threshold of causation met. TORT — Negligence — Psychiatric injury — Whether moderate depression following miscarriage was foreseeable — Emotional harm not too remote — Expert psychiatric evidence unchallenged — Liability established. TORT — Vicarious liability — Public hospital staff — Government of Malaysia liable under Government Proceedings Act 1956, section 5 — Acts of supervisors within scope of public duties — Systemic institutional failures established. 1 misfeance in public office — whether tort of misfeance involves both public and private law elements. 1
+ 3 more
Kecuaian — Treler muatan luar biasa — Muatan melintang laluan — Tiada lampu amaran — Permit tidak sah — Kegagalan SOP eskot — Prima facie kecuaian — Tanggungjawab lebih tinggi kenderaan berat — Pembahagian liabiliti. Keterangan — Percanggahan saksi — Kebolehpercayaan — Pembayaran saman sebagai pengakuan sokongan. Undang-undang Trafik — Pelanggaran Kaedah 16 Kaedah Lalu Lintas 1959 — Amalan keselamatan muatan besar. Ganti Rugi — Penilaian kuantum — Garis panduan — Kecederaan otak serius — Kos penjagaan masa hadapan — Tiada asas menaikkan kuantum. Prosedur — Rayuan & rayuan silang — Standard campur tangan — Liabiliti diselaraskan 90:10. 2 cases
ba-12b-54-06-2024 1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD v JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind)
9 October 2025
ba-12b-56-06-2024 JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind) v 1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD
9 October 2025
Kemalangan jalan raya — Beban pembuktian — Akta Keterangan 1950 ss 101–102 — Kegagalan plaintif membuktikan penglibatan defendan — Percanggahan keterangan — Dokumen kontemporari — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan — Prinsip plainly wrong — Insufficient judicial appreciation of evidence — Kuantum — Taksiran gantirugi bersyarat — Tiada liabiliti — Insurans motor — Rayuan balas penanggung insurans — Remedi deklaratori — Isu akademik — Tiada keperluan deklarasi — Rayuan ditolak — Kos dalam kos 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Road maintenance contractor — Plastic cone on road shoulder — Whether contractor negligent — Burden of proof — Balance of probabilities — Evidence Act 1950, s 101 Evidence — Evaluation — Conflicting versions — Police reports lodged belatedly — Police reports lodged on same date using similar language — Whether reports orchestrated by third party — Credibility and probative value — Investigating officer’s conclusion based on presumption — Hearsay evidence — Medical records Appeal — Findings of fact — Trial judge’s failure to judicially appreciate evidence — Undue reliance on police reports — Whether findings plainly wrong — Appellate intervention— “Plainly wrong” test 1 case
Negligence — Duty of care — Contractor carrying out excavation works — Damage to underground cables belonging to utility company — Whether contractor exercised reasonable diligence 1 case
professional negligence suit commenced by a bank against a property/estate valuer for overvaluing a property resulting a loss to the bank 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Motorcycle colliding with rear left side of car — Whether trial court erred in fixing 100% liability on motorcyclist — Failure of driver to signal before changing lane — Sudden lateral movement — Physical damage pattern corroborating plaintiff’s version — Investigating officer’s independent evidence — Sessions Court’s misdirection — Contributory negligence — Apportionment of liability — Whether 70:30 apportionment justified. 1 case
Misfeasance in public office — Elements of the tort — Abuse of public power by a public officer with targeted malice or reckless indifference to the probability of harm — Failure to prove bad faith, ill-will, or intention to injure — Public officer acting in accordance with official procedure and existing laws — Tort not established. 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Liability not in issue — Appeal on quantum Damages — Assessment — Loss of consciousness — Mild traumatic brain injury — Modest enhancement Damages — Assessment — Shoulder impingement — Functional limitation — Award enhanced Damages — Special damages — Physiotherapy — Strict proof — Award affirmed Damages — Future medical expenses — Arcoxia — Speculative claim — Duty to mitigate — Claim dismissed Appeal — Appellate restraint — Limited interference with quantum 1 case
Conspiracy to injure — Unlawful means conspiracy — Elements to prove — Combination, intention to injure, unlawful acts, resultant loss — Suspicious sequence of events insufficient — Evidence falling short of proving concerted agreement on balance of probabilities — Distinction between commercial opportunism and targeted conspiracy 1 case
Conspiracy (unlawful means) — Elements — Agreement — Intention to injure — Overt acts — Damage — Strict pleading requirements — Familial relationship — Whether sufficient to infer conspiracy Pleading — Fraud and dishonesty — Strict particularisation — General allegations insufficient — Inference versus fact — Failure to plead dishonesty, assistance and causal link 1 case
Vicarious liability — Whether landlord can be held vicariously liable for acts of tenant — Applicability of close connection test — Whether landlord-tenant relationship sufficient to impose liability 1 case
Conspiracy — Conspiracy to injure — Elements of conspiracy — Requirement of knowledge and intent for co-signatory of cheques 1 case
negligence — vehicle chassis number tempered with — what is the standard of reasonable care of PUSPAKOM in inspecting the car — whether PUSPAKOM ought to carry out tests beyond visual inspection. 1 case
Defamation — Libel — Allegation of defamatory posts and article — Whether the publications referred to the Plaintiffs — Whether the publications lead reasonable people who know the Plaintiffs to the conclusion that the Publications refer to them — Whether the publication is capable of bearing the pleaded imputations — Defective pleading — Whether defendants succeeded in proving defences of justification and fair comment 1 case
Negligence — Road accident — Respondent involved in an accident with the deceased’s motorcycle — Dependency claim by deceased's spouse and children — Whether appellants discharged burden of showing negligence — Whether court should attach any weight to IO's opinion 1 case
Negligence — Duty of care — Pregnancy in workplace — Employer’s duty to assess occupational risks upon disclosure of pregnancy — Failure to conduct risk assessment under Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (OSHA) — Whether statutory duty breached — Whether light duty unjustifiably denied despite oral request — Whether internal policy requiring written application too rigid — Duty of proactive response under OSHA sections 15 and 16 — Whether breach of duty materially increased risk of miscarriage. TORT — Negligence — Causation — Link between employer’s omissions and miscarriage — Application of ‘material contribution’ test — ‘But for’ test inapplicable where multiple contributing factors — Expert evidence supports workplace stress as material contributor — Trifling contributions excluded — Legal threshold of causation met. TORT — Negligence — Psychiatric injury — Whether moderate depression following miscarriage was foreseeable — Emotional harm not too remote — Expert psychiatric evidence unchallenged — Liability established. TORT — Vicarious liability — Public hospital staff — Government of Malaysia liable under Government Proceedings Act 1956, section 5 — Acts of supervisors within scope of public duties — Systemic institutional failures established. 1 case
misfeance in public office — whether tort of misfeance involves both public and private law elements. 1 case
Assault — Assesment of danger — what aggravated and exemplary damages may be awarded in tort 1 case
Trespass — Trespass to land — Illegal squatters — Supply of electricity to occupiers of land and emplacement of conduits on land without consent of registered landowner — Whether action in trespass maintainable in law when period of trespass was for same period when stay order was in force in respect of subject land — Whether action in trespass maintainable against appellant for supply of electricity to occupants of premises on subject land pursuant to s 24(1) and (5) of the Electricity Supply Act 1990 upon determination that occupants in unlawful occupation of subject land — Electricity Supply Act 1990 ss24(1) & (5) — Federal Constitution art 13 1 case
Defamation — Libel in newspaper — Plaintiff a politician — Publication of defamatory statements in two news articles — Whether statements referred to plaintiff — Whether words in news articles were defamatory of plaintiff — Whether defendants establish the Reynolds privilege defence — Defences — Whether defendants could rely on defences of qualified privilege and fair comment —Damages— Assessment of damages Quantum of — Whether seriousness of libel and recklessness in its publication were relevant factors in determining quantum — Defamation Act 1957 [Act 286], s 12 & Schedule Part 2 1 case
Key Statutes
cited in 1 case
cited in 1 case
Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
cited in 1 case Contracts Act
1950
cited in 1 case Government Proceedings Act 1956
cited in 1 case Contracts
Act 1950
cited in 1 case Contract Act 1950
cited in 1 case Federal Constitution
cited in 1 case Rules of Court 2012
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Top Firms
Cases
ja-12b-69-11-2023
KIRUBAKARAN A/L MUNIANDY v 1. ) NADRAJAN A/L CHEN CHIAH 2. ) SUGUMARAN A/L KRISHNAN 3. ) AM GENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD
22 January 2026
MYHC
da-12b-9-04-2025
ROADCARE (M) SDN BHD v 1. ) NIK MUHAMAD ALIF HAIQAL BIN ZULKIFLI KANG 2. ) MUHAMMAD HILMAN HAKIM BIN ABDUL SATAPA
13 December 2025
MYHC
ba-21ncvc-23-06-2024
ANANDA KUMAR A/L S.MAHARAJAH v 1. ) PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA 2. ) Nurul Husna Binti Amran 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
9 December 2025
MYHC
wa-11bncvc-22-06-2025
KURNIA EKUITI SDN. BHD. v TM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES SDN. BHD.
9 December 2025
MYHC
ja-22ncvc-51-03-2020
OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad v 1. ) Wong Yee Leck 2. ) Abdul Rahim Abdul Rahman 3. ) Rahim & Co. Chartered Surveyors Sdn. Bhd. 4. ) Loo Kung Hoe 5. ) RAHIM & CO (JOHOR) SDN. BHD
25 November 2025
MYHC
ta-12b-15-12-2024
AZAHA BIN DERAMAN v Mohd Napi B Abdul Razak & Mohd Hanafi B Hasim
25 November 2025
MYHC
w-01ncvcw-180-03-2024
GULAM WAWASAN SDN BHD v 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) KEMENTERIAN PERUMAHAN DAN KERAJAAN TEMPATAN 3. ) JABATAN PENGURUSAN SISA PEPEJAL NEGARA 4. ) Dato' Sri Haji Mohammad Bin Mentek, Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan 5. ) ISMAIL BIN MOKHTAR, KETUA EKSEKUTIF SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 6. ) SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC CLEANSING MANAGEMENT CORPOR
20 November 2025
MYCOA
ta-12b-14-11-2024
A.AIDIP BIN A.ZAIDI v 1. ) ZARIF ZAHIRUDDIN BIN ZALI 2. ) ZAITON BINTI ISMAIL
15 November 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-12-02-2025
1. ) MOORTHY A/L MUNIANDY 2. ) PRAVIN RAO A/L MOORTHY v NITHYANANTAN A/L YASUDABER
11 November 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-785-10-2023
EXELLE MEDICAL SDN. BHD. v 1. ) MK MEDILANCE SDN. BHD. 2. ) INTERMEDECO SDN. BHD. 3. ) CHIN KEH JOO
9 November 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-696-10-2024
1. ) ECO-BUILD PTE LTD 2. ) PETRA ECO-BUILD (AUST) PTY LTD 3. ) ECO BUILD MODULAR SDN BHD v 1. ) AMREEK SINGH DHILLON 2. ) SUSHIL SINGH SIDHU 3. ) LEUNG KOK KEONG 4. ) TAN YAN SHIOU 5. ) CHU HUI PENG 6. ) SIMREN KAUR DHILLON 7. ) RAJWANT SINGH A/L G NERANJAN SINGH 8. ) STEFAN MAHIR ALDJUFRI 9. ) RiBT GLOBAL SDN BHD 10. ) PT RISJADSON BHUMI NUSANTARA
22 October 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-54-06-2024
1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD v JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind)
9 October 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-56-06-2024
JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind) v 1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD
9 October 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncvc-174-03-2025
1. ) GENERALI INSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 2. ) TAKAFUL IKHLAS GENERAL BERHAD 3. ) SS MOTOR CENTURY SDN. BHD. v 1. ) WAWASAN SINAR GEMILANG SDN. BHD. 2. ) Kua Guan Chai 3. ) Phun Booi Mooi
7 October 2025
MYHC
wa-12bncc-16-06-2023
1. ) TAN TEE HUI 2. ) Soon Siew Ling v DE FOOD CREATOR SDN BHD
24 September 2025
MYHC
j-01ncvcw-163-03-2023
SUSHILA RANI A/P RAMASAMY v 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Penjara Kluang
23 September 2025
MYCOA
da-12b-19-05-2023
PUSAT PEMERIKSAAN KENDERAAN BERKOMPUTER (PUSPAKOM) v 1. ) Sufrin Bin Mansor 2. ) MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 3. ) FOCAL PARK SDN BHD
17 September 2025
MYHC
ba-23cy-5-02-2023
1. ) SITI FARHANA BINTI MOHD PAKEH 2. ) AHMAD FIRDAUS BIN MUHAMAD NGADI v SITI NUR AINIEN SOFIEYA BINTI MOHD ZUKI
2 June 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-51-05-2024
1. ) NUR FARIHA BINTI HAIMI (Menuntut sebagai isteri yang sah dan tanggungan yang sah kepada Mohd Helmi Bin Ngadimin (Simati) untuk kehilangan tanggungan, kesedihan dan dukacitaan serta kerugian perbelanjaan di bawah Seksyen 7, Akta Undang-Undang Sivil 1956 serta menuntut untuk faedah estet Simati di bawah Seksyen 8, Akta Undang-Undang Sivil 1956) 2. ) XXXX v SYED MUZAFFAR SHAH BIN SYED AZMAN SHAH
13 May 2025
MYHC
aa-21ncvc-18-06-2021
1. ) INTAN SHAHARZAD BINTI MOHD AZRI 2. ) AHMAD AZIB BIN AHMAD v 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) PENGARAH HOSPITAL TELUK INTAN 3. ) DR KHAIRUL BAHARIN BIN MOHD BAHARUDDIN 4. ) DR EDWARD DANIEL A/L JACOB 5. ) KASMANI BIN KADIR 6. ) AHMAD HAILME BIN ABDUL HALIM
7 May 2025
MYHC
21ncvc-27-06-2020
Mohd Sofi bin Abdul Ghafar [NRIC No.: 541118-04-5207] v 1. Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi 2. Kerajaan Malaysia
21 March 2021
MYHC
12b-45-03-2019
Teh Yet Poh [No. K/P: 801221-10-5544] v Teh Ming Choo [No. K/P: 860130-10-5442]
4 August 2020
MYHC
02f-108-10-2017j
Tenaga Nasional Berhad v Bukit Lenang Development Sdn Bhd
30 October 2018
MYFC
02f-100-12-2014s
DATUK HARRIS MOHD SALLEH … APPELLANT v 1. DATUK YONG TECK LEE (Sued in his personal capacity and as an officer of the 2nd Respondent) 2. SABAH PROGRESSIVE PARTY … RESPONDENT
25 October 2017
MYFC