MUHD SABRI SYAFIQ BIN MOHAMED ROMLI NAVINKUMAR A/L MAGENDRAN

MUHD SABRI SYAFIQ BIN MOHAMED ROMLI NAVINKUMAR A/L MAGENDRAN

The High Court held that contributory negligence must be pleaded as 'contributory negligence' by the defendant to become an issue; appellant/defendant had not pleaded contributory negligence (only pleaded 'negligence'), therefore liability remains 100% against the appellant/defendant. The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's quantum assessments as reasonable and dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal; no costs ordered.

Citation
JA-12B-49-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Muhd Sabri Syafiq bin Mohamed Romli; Respondent / Plaintiff: Navinkumar a/l Magendran
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 November 2021
Case Number
JA-12B-49-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment / High Court Appeal and Cross Appeal (determination on Liability and Quantum)
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; liability of Muhd Sabri Syafiq bin Mohamed Romli affirmed as 100% for the accident; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Pleadings, Assessment of Damages, Apportionment of Liability, Special Damages, Recoverability of Insurer Paid Medical Expenses (s.28 A)
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Civil Procedure Personal Injury Insurance Law Employment Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Pleadings +4 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhd Sabri Syafiq bin Mohamed Romli

Appellant / Defendant

Navinkumar a/l Magendran

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment / High Court Appeal and Cross Appeal (determination on Liability and Quantum)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether contributory negligence (kecuaian sumbangan) must be pleaded by defendant to be considered by court
  2. 2 Whether Sessions Court erred in imposing 100% liability on appellant when both parties gave conflicting versions
  3. 3 Whether quantum awards for multiple heads of injury and special damages were excessive or inadequate

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that contributory negligence must be pleaded as 'contributory negligence' by the defendant to become an issue; appellant/defendant had not pleaded contributory negligence (only pleaded 'negligence'), therefore liability remains 100% against the appellant/defendant. The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's quantum assessments as reasonable and dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal; no costs ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed; liability of Muhd Sabri Syafiq bin Mohamed Romli affirmed as 100% for the accident; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Cross-appeal dismissed