1. ) SANCO ELECTRICAL SDN BHD 2. ) POON YIAN LON NORISMADI BIN ABDUL MANAP

1. ) SANCO ELECTRICAL SDN BHD 2. ) POON YIAN LON NORISMADI BIN ABDUL MANAP

The High Court held that s28(1)(a) is concerned with the adjudged sum (RM8,836.00) so the appeal by the appellants was incompetent absent a genuine question of law; the appellants failed to demonstrate a question of law; the Magistrate did not err in finding liability on the balance of probabilities based on police report, IO evidence, sketch and the defendant's compound payment; however the Magistrate erred in disallowing proven special damages for vehicle repairs and the cross-appeal allowing RM28,753.40 for repairs is allowed while other heads and magistrates' costs are affirmed.

Citation
BA-11B-33-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: SANCO ELECTRICAL SDN BHD; Appellant/defendant: MOHD AZHAR BIN MOHAMED; Respondent/plaintiff: NORISMADI BIN ABDUL MANAP
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 April 2025
Case Number
BA-11B-33-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Magistrates' Court / Determination on Appeal (high Court, Shah Alam)
Outcome
Main appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Negligence, Special Damages, Appealability and Threshold Under Courts of Judicature Act, Contributory Negligence, Burden of Proof, Admissibility of Public Documents and Hearsay
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Civil Procedure Evidence Road Traffic Law Negligence Special Damages Appealability and Threshold Under Courts of Judicature Act Contributory Negligence +2 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SANCO ELECTRICAL SDN BHD

Appellant/defendant

MOHD AZHAR BIN MOHAMED

Appellant/defendant

NORISMADI BIN ABDUL MANAP

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Magistrates' Court / Determination on Appeal (high Court, Shah Alam)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrates' Court decision is appealable under s28(1)(a) Courts of Judicature Act 1964
  2. 2 Whether a question of law exists to permit appeal despite monetary threshold not met
  3. 3 Whether liability was proved on balance of probabilities

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that s28(1)(a) is concerned with the adjudged sum (RM8,836.00) so the appeal by the appellants was incompetent absent a genuine question of law; the appellants failed to demonstrate a question of law; the Magistrate did not err in finding liability on the balance of probabilities based on police report, IO evidence, sketch and the defendant's compound payment; however the Magistrate erred in disallowing proven special damages for vehicle repairs and the cross-appeal allowing RM28,753.40 for repairs is allowed while other heads and magistrates' costs are affirmed.

Court Disposition

Main appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Main appeal dismissed
  • Cross-appeal allowed: RM28,753.40 awarded for vehicle repair costs to the Respondent/Plaintiff