LEE TUAN HOCK @ LEE HENG GUAN MOHD SIDEK BIN MAHADI

LEE TUAN HOCK @ LEE HENG GUAN MOHD SIDEK BIN MAHADI

The High Court held the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong: it properly evaluated oral and silent evidence (photographs, vehicle damage, police and investigation findings) to apportion liability 80% to defendant and 20% to plaintiff; the quantum awards including RM70,000 for the mild head injury and the special and future loss awards were within judicial discretion and not so unreasonable as to warrant interference; claim for EPF contributions was correctly rejected as plaintiff was no longer an employee.

Citation
JA-12B-20-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Perayu/plaintif: LEE TUAN HOCK @ LEE HENG GUAN; Responden/defendan: MOHD SIDEK BIN MAHADI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 November 2022
Case Number
JA-12B-20-07/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (rayuan Sivil) / High Court Judgment on Consolidated Appeals (appeal Hearing Concluded)
Outcome
Both appeals dismissed; Sessions Court judgment affirmed
Legal Topics
Liability Apportionment, Quantum of Damages, Contributory Negligence, Loss of Earnings, EPF Contributions
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Motor Accident Personal Injury Civil Procedure Liability Apportionment Quantum of Damages Contributory Negligence Loss of Earnings +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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LEE TUAN HOCK @ LEE HENG GUAN

Perayu/plaintif

MOHD SIDEK BIN MAHADI

Responden/defendan

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (rayuan Sivil) / High Court Judgment on Consolidated Appeals (appeal Hearing Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court erred in apportioning liability 80% to defendant and 20% contributory negligence to plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the quantum awards including RM70,000 for mild head injury and denial of awards for ankle stiffness and soft tissue pain were excessive, inadequate or erroneous
  3. 3 Whether awards for partial loss of future earnings and loss of earning capacity are duplicative or improperly awarded

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong: it properly evaluated oral and silent evidence (photographs, vehicle damage, police and investigation findings) to apportion liability 80% to defendant and 20% to plaintiff; the quantum awards including RM70,000 for the mild head injury and the special and future loss awards were within judicial discretion and not so unreasonable as to warrant interference; claim for EPF contributions was correctly rejected as plaintiff was no longer an employee.

Court Disposition

Both appeals dismissed; Sessions Court judgment affirmed

Orders

  • Appeals JA-12B-20-07/2021 and JA-12B-28-07/2021 dismissed
  • Sessions Court judgment dated 15.7.2021 affirmed (liability apportioned 80% defendant, 20% plaintiff)