TAN PENG HUAT [ No.Kad Pengenalan : 521027015477] TAN HEE SOON [ No.Kad Pengenalan : 570111015067]

TAN PENG HUAT [ No.Kad Pengenalan : 521027015477] TAN HEE SOON [ No.Kad Pengenalan : 570111015067]

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the plaintiff's version supported by credible eyewitness evidence (SP2), treating doctor's findings (SP3) and medical records including X-ray P4; SP3 admissible as an expert under s45 Evidence Act; P4 admissible as hospital record under s73A; plaintiff proved elements of assault and battery and is entitled to damages; special damages, loss of earnings and continuation/emotional damages not proven and injunction not warranted.

Citation
JA-A73-5-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
PLAINTIF: Tan Peng Huat; DEFENDAN: Tan Hee Soon
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 April 2021
Case Number
JA-A73-5-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort (assault and Battery) / Judgment (full Hearing) on Appeal From Magistrate Court Decision
Outcome
Plaintiff's civil claim for assault and battery allowed in part; defendant held liable.
Legal Topics
Assault and Battery, Expert Evidence, Admissibility of Medical Imaging, Assessment of Damages, Injunction
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Personal Injury Evidence Civil Procedure Assault and Battery Expert Evidence Admissibility of Medical Imaging Assessment of Damages +1 more

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 7 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Peng Huat

PLAINTIF

Tan Hee Soon

DEFENDAN

Procedural Posture

Civil Tort (assault and Battery) / Judgment (full Hearing) on Appeal From Magistrate Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant intentionally or negligently assaulted and caused injury to plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether medical officer SP3 qualifies as an expert and whether his evidence is admissible
  3. 3 Whether eyewitness SP2 is an interested witness whose evidence should be rejected or corroborated

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the plaintiff's version supported by credible eyewitness evidence (SP2), treating doctor's findings (SP3) and medical records including X-ray P4; SP3 admissible as an expert under s45 Evidence Act; P4 admissible as hospital record under s73A; plaintiff proved elements of assault and battery and is entitled to damages; special damages, loss of earnings and continuation/emotional damages not proven and injunction not warranted.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's civil claim for assault and battery allowed in part; defendant held liable.

Orders

  • Award general damages RM25,000.00
  • Award exemplary (exemplary/teladan) damages RM10,000.00