Chuan Wei Farm Sdn Bhd 1. ) Pang Pau Ru 2. ) Pang Kwang Soon PIHAK TERKILAN OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad

Chuan Wei Farm Sdn Bhd 1. ) Pang Pau Ru 2. ) Pang Kwang Soon PIHAK TERKILAN OCBC Bank (Malaysia) Berhad

The court allowed the post-judgment amendment because the proposed correction was a bona fide clerical correction of a defendant's name that did not alter the identity of the party or any adjudicated issue and caused no prejudice; technical misstatement of the rule cited did not defeat the application and the doctrine of functus officio did not preclude the amendment in these circumstances.

Citation
PB-B52NCvC-27-10/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintif: Chuan Wei Farm Sdn Bhd; Defendan Pertama: Pang Pau Ru; Defendan Kedua: Pang Kwang Soon
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 May 2022
Case Number
PB-B52NCvC-27-10/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Debt Recovery/contract Claim for Goods and Services / Post Judgment Amendment Application to Correct Defendant's Name
Outcome
Application (Kandungan 54) allowed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Functus Officio, Correction of Clerical Errors, Inherent Jurisdiction
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Company Records Amendment of Pleadings Functus Officio Correction of Clerical Errors Inherent Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chuan Wei Farm Sdn Bhd

Plaintif

Pang Pau Ru

Defendan Pertama

Pang Kwang Soon

Defendan Kedua

Procedural Posture

Debt Recovery/contract Claim for Goods and Services / Post Judgment Amendment Application to Correct Defendant's Name

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can allow amendment of a party's name after judgment has been entered
  2. 2 Whether the application is time-barred or incompetent because the wrong rule was cited (O.20 r.5/7 vs O.20 r.11)
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of functus officio prevents the court from granting the amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed the post-judgment amendment because the proposed correction was a bona fide clerical correction of a defendant's name that did not alter the identity of the party or any adjudicated issue and caused no prejudice; technical misstatement of the rule cited did not defeat the application and the doctrine of functus officio did not preclude the amendment in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application (Kandungan 54) allowed

Orders

  • Kandungan 54 is allowed and the second defendant's name is amended in the writ, the order and the judgment dated 12.8.2021