FINJAYA SDN. BHD. (Company No: 199801009023 (465150-A)) 1. TANG TWANG LOI 2. LAU TENG TIONG 3. ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (Company No: 201401009891 (1085970-T)) 4. MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. (Company No: 201401011437 (1087513-W)
The application to admit fresh evidence was allowed because the evidence did not exist at the time of the Sessions Court hearing and thus could not have been adduced with reasonable diligence, the correspondence was relevant and likely to have influenced the intervention decision, the documents were credible, any delay was reasonably explained and not prejudicial, and the procedural intitulement error was a curable typographical mistake; accordingly justice required admitting the fresh evidence and awarding costs to the Proposed Intervener.
- Citation
- JA-12ANCvC-13-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Appellant (proposed Intervener in Sessions Court): FINJAYA SDN. BHD.; Respondent (plaintiff / Judgment Creditor): TANG TWANG LOI; Respondent (plaintiff / Judgment Creditor): LAU TENG TIONG; Respondent (defendant / Judgment Debtor): ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.; Respondent (defendant / Judgment Debtor): MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.; Respondent (garnishee): MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 12 December 2021
- Case Number
- JA-12ANCvC-13-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal to High Court From Sessions Court Garnishee/intervention Proceedings / Hearing of Appeal — Application to Admit Fresh Evidence Under Order 55 Rule 7
- Outcome
- Application allowed; fresh evidence admitted; costs awarded to Proposed Intervener (Appellant).
- Legal Topics
- Admission of Fresh Evidence, Intervention in Garnishee Proceedings, Procedural Irregularity and Intitulement, Overriding Objective and Curable Defects
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
FINJAYA SDN. BHD.
Appellant (proposed Intervener in Sessions Court)
TANG TWANG LOI
Respondent (plaintiff / Judgment Creditor)
LAU TENG TIONG
Respondent (plaintiff / Judgment Creditor)
ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.
Respondent (defendant / Judgment Debtor)
MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.
Respondent (defendant / Judgment Debtor)
MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD
Respondent (garnishee)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal to High Court From Sessions Court Garnishee/intervention Proceedings / Hearing of Appeal — Application to Admit Fresh Evidence Under Order 55 Rule 7
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether fresh evidence (letters dated 17, 19 and 21 February 2021) should be admitted on appeal under Order 55 rule 7 and Ladd v Marshall tests
- 2 Whether delay in filing the application to admit fresh evidence was inordinate and prejudicial
- 3 Whether procedural defects in the intitulement (wrong company registration number) were fatal or curable
Ratio Decidendi
The application to admit fresh evidence was allowed because the evidence did not exist at the time of the Sessions Court hearing and thus could not have been adduced with reasonable diligence, the correspondence was relevant and likely to have influenced the intervention decision, the documents were credible, any delay was reasonably explained and not prejudicial, and the procedural intitulement error was a curable typographical mistake; accordingly justice required admitting the fresh evidence and awarding costs to the Proposed Intervener.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; fresh evidence admitted; costs awarded to Proposed Intervener (Appellant).
Orders
- Application to adduce fresh evidence allowed
- Correspondence dated 17, 19 and 21 February 2021 admitted as fresh evidence on the appeal
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment