Wakil Diri Bagi Harta Pusaka, Tan Wee Piak, Si Mati MOHAMMED BIN MISKAM

Wakil Diri Bagi Harta Pusaka, Tan Wee Piak, Si Mati MOHAMMED BIN MISKAM

The High Court found there was no error in the trial judge’s factual findings or exercise of discretion. The trial judge properly evaluated and preferred the plaintiff’s expert evidence where justified, the awards (muscle wasting RM5,000; ACL injury RM20,000; future pain/suffering RM10,000; future surgical costs RM12,000 and RM10,000; orthotic costs RM291,000) were reasonable and supported by the evidence, and the appellant failed to demonstrate specific overlapping injuries warranting a deduction; accordingly the appeal on quantum is dismissed.

Citation
JB-12BNCvC-15-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Wakil Diri bagi Harta Pusaka, Tan Wee Piak (deceased); Respondent/plaintiff: Mohammed bin Miskam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 April 2023
Case Number
JB-12BNCvC-15-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal — Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Accident) / High Court Determination on Appeal (quantum of Damages)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Assessment of Damages, Expert Evidence, Overlapping Awards, Future Medical Costs, Prosthetic/orthotic Awards
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Personal Injury Civil Procedure Motor Vehicle Accident Quantum of Damages Assessment of Damages Expert Evidence Overlapping Awards +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wakil Diri bagi Harta Pusaka, Tan Wee Piak (deceased)

Appellant/defendant

Mohammed bin Miskam

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal — Personal Injury (motor Vehicle Accident) / High Court Determination on Appeal (quantum of Damages)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding damages for muscle wasting
  2. 2 Whether the award for anterior cruciate ligament injury should be allowed or excluded
  3. 3 Whether an award for pain and suffering relating to future surgery is permissible

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found there was no error in the trial judge’s factual findings or exercise of discretion. The trial judge properly evaluated and preferred the plaintiff’s expert evidence where justified, the awards (muscle wasting RM5,000; ACL injury RM20,000; future pain/suffering RM10,000; future surgical costs RM12,000 and RM10,000; orthotic costs RM291,000) were reasonable and supported by the evidence, and the appellant failed to demonstrate specific overlapping injuries warranting a deduction; accordingly the appeal on quantum is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; defendant/appellant's appeal on quantum is refused
  • No order as to costs (appeal dismissed without costs)