CHING SUET YEEN ANN JOO METAL SDN BHD

CHING SUET YEEN ANN JOO METAL SDN BHD

The court exercised its discretion under Order 3 rule 5 KKM 2012 and refused the application for extension of time because the applicant failed to provide satisfactory and causally relevant reasons for the delay (COVID-19 infection and December floods found irrelevant), the Notice of Appeal had been processed by the Labour Office, and there was no sufficient justification to permit late filing of the Record of Appeal; accordingly the extension and the Notice of Appeal were dismissed without costs.

Citation
BA-16-9-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant (perayu): Ching Suet Yeen; Respondent (defendan): Ann Joo Metal Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 December 2022
Case Number
BA-16-9-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Labour Court / Application for Extension of Time to File Record of Appeal (pre Hearing)
Outcome
Application for extension of time to file Record of Appeal dismissed; Notice of Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Labour Tribunal Decisions
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Employment/labour Law Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Labour Tribunal Decisions

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ching Suet Yeen

Appellant (perayu)

Ann Joo Metal Sdn Bhd

Respondent (defendan)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Labour Court / Application for Extension of Time to File Record of Appeal (pre Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to file the record of appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether delay was justified by COVID-19 infection or December 2021 floods
  3. 3 Whether procedural non-compliance warrants refusal of extension

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion under Order 3 rule 5 KKM 2012 and refused the application for extension of time because the applicant failed to provide satisfactory and causally relevant reasons for the delay (COVID-19 infection and December floods found irrelevant), the Notice of Appeal had been processed by the Labour Office, and there was no sufficient justification to permit late filing of the Record of Appeal; accordingly the extension and the Notice of Appeal were dismissed without costs.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to file Record of Appeal dismissed; Notice of Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time to file the Record of Appeal (Kandungan 3) is dismissed without costs.
  • Notice of Appeal (Kandungan 1) is dismissed without costs.