M
Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri
Person 1 case
Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri appeared as a party in the following Malaysia court case:
ma-22ncvc-2-01-2019
Marjan Petrovski v 1. ) Datuk Seri Utama IR Haji Idris bin Hj Haron 2. ) Datuk Wira Mohd Yusoff bin Hj Mahadi 3. ) Ahmad Roslee bin Hamzah 4. ) Datuk Hj Fadzil bin A. Bakar 5. ) Khairi Anuar bin Ahmad 6. ) Tn Hj Ramli bin Mohd Ali 7. ) Noor Azman bin Hj. Rahman 8. ) Razak bin Abu Hassan 9. ) Shamsuddin bin Hassan 10. ) A. Subramaniam 11. ) Tan Ching Yang 12. ) S Pathy 13. ) Nazri bin Abu Bakar 14. ) Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri 15. ) Bakri bin Neemat
MYHC 29 April 2025
See the full case for complete details including judgment text, legal issues, and counsel involved.
About Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri
Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri appears as a party in 1 judgment in the MY Case Law database, spanning April 2025 to April 2025. Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri appeared as defendant in 1 case. Cases span the High Court (1).
How many court cases involve Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri?
Mohd Saiful bin Mat Sapri appears in 1 published judgment from April 2025 to April 2025. Most commonly as defendant (1 cases).
Practice Areas
"Sports and law of negligence 1 Plaintiff is the deceased's father suing as dependent and personal representative and/or administrator of the estate 1 Plaintiff also claims breach of contract for failure to take out a Personal Accident Insurance as required under the terms of the Player's Contract and breach of undertaking to pay all salaries of the deceased for the remaining period of the Player's Contract 1 Issues: (i) whether there a duty of care owed by the football club to the deceased; (ii) whether the FIFA Guideline was binding on the Defendants; (iii) was there was a breach of that duty of care; (iv) there was causation between the lightning injury and the player's death or whether it was an Act of God; (v) whether there was a breach of contract and undertaking; and (vi) whether Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought. 1 Findings: (i) there was a duty of care owed to the deceased to provide for a safe working environment and to provide for adequate emergency medical assistance 1 Held: (i) Plaintiff had proven on balance of probabilities that Defendant's owed a duty of care to the deceased and that the duty was breached 1