1. ) ABD LATIF BIN AHMAD 2. ) Abd Latif Bin Ahmad (Wakil Diri Kepada Harta Pusaka Mendiang Ahmad Bin Thahir (No. Kp: 391012-10-5055 Si Mati) TAN KIM SAN

1. ) ABD LATIF BIN AHMAD 2. ) Abd Latif Bin Ahmad (Wakil Diri Kepada Harta Pusaka Mendiang Ahmad Bin Thahir (No. Kp: 391012-10-5055 Si Mati) TAN KIM SAN

Appellate court found an appealable error in the magistrate's apportionment: evidence and probabilities showed the plaintiff was substantially to blame. The court set aside the magistrate's 90/10 apportionment and substituted a 70/30 apportionment (plaintiff 70% liable, D1 30% liable) but declined to disturb the quantum of damages awarded.

Citation
BA-11B-28-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: ABDUL LATIF BIN AHMAD; Appellant/defendant: ABDUL LATIF BIN AHMAD (WAKIL DIRI KEPADA HARTA PUSAKA MENDIANG AHMAD BIN THAHIR (SIMATI)); Respondent/plaintiff: TAN KIM SAN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
4 April 2022
Case Number
BA-11B-28-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (motor Vehicle Accident) / Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part. Magistrate's order on liability set aside and substituted with apportionment of liability at 70% plaintiff / 30% defendant. Quantum of damages unchanged. Costs awarded to appellants.
Legal Topics
Apportionment of Liability, Contributory Negligence, Appellate Review of Factual Findings, Assessment of Evidence
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Negligence Road Traffic Law Civil Procedure Apportionment of Liability Contributory Negligence Appellate Review of Factual Findings Assessment of Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABDUL LATIF BIN AHMAD

Appellant/defendant

ABDUL LATIF BIN AHMAD (WAKIL DIRI KEPADA HARTA PUSAKA MENDIANG AHMAD BIN THAHIR (SIMATI))

Appellant/defendant

TAN KIM SAN

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (motor Vehicle Accident) / Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who caused the collision and in what proportions should liability be apportioned
  2. 2 Whether the trial magistrate's 90/10 apportionment was against the weight of evidence and therefore open to appellate correction
  3. 3 Whether the quantum of damages should be disturbed

Ratio Decidendi

Appellate court found an appealable error in the magistrate's apportionment: evidence and probabilities showed the plaintiff was substantially to blame. The court set aside the magistrate's 90/10 apportionment and substituted a 70/30 apportionment (plaintiff 70% liable, D1 30% liable) but declined to disturb the quantum of damages awarded.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part. Magistrate's order on liability set aside and substituted with apportionment of liability at 70% plaintiff / 30% defendant. Quantum of damages unchanged. Costs awarded to appellants.

Orders

  • Set aside magistrate's apportionment of liability
  • Liability apportioned as Plaintiff 70% and Defendant 30%