MUHAMMAD HANAFI BIN THALDIRI 1. ) OSMAN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 2. ) NOR HAFFIZAH BINTI ABDUL MUBIN

MUHAMMAD HANAFI BIN THALDIRI 1. ) OSMAN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 2. ) NOR HAFFIZAH BINTI ABDUL MUBIN

High Court held there was no demonstrable 'plainly wrong' error in the Session Court's exercise of discretion on quantum: awards were based on agreed expert reports, witness evidence and compendium guidance; where findings were contested the trial judge had sufficient basis; appellate intervention not warranted absent fundamental misdirection; therefore appeal dismissed and awards upheld (subject to liability apportionment).

Citation
JA-12B-95-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Muhammad Hanafi bin Thaldiri; Respondent/plaintiff: Osman bin Abdul Rahman; Respondent/plaintiff: Nor Haffizah binti Abdul Mubin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 September 2023
Case Number
JA-12B-95-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Session Court on Quantum Only
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of Session Court on quantum upheld.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Liability Apportionment, Expert Evidence, Standard of Appellate Review
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Personal Injury Civil Procedure Appeals Quantum of Damages Liability Apportionment Expert Evidence Standard of Appellate Review

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Hanafi bin Thaldiri

Appellant/defendant

Osman bin Abdul Rahman

Respondent/plaintiff

Nor Haffizah binti Abdul Mubin

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Session Court on Quantum Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether awards for specific heads of damage were excessive or unsupported by evidence
  2. 2 Whether certain injuries and future risks were caused by the accident
  3. 3 Whether appellate court should intervene in trial judge's discretionary assessment of damages

Ratio Decidendi

High Court held there was no demonstrable 'plainly wrong' error in the Session Court's exercise of discretion on quantum: awards were based on agreed expert reports, witness evidence and compendium guidance; where findings were contested the trial judge had sufficient basis; appellate intervention not warranted absent fundamental misdirection; therefore appeal dismissed and awards upheld (subject to liability apportionment).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of Session Court on quantum upheld.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and Session Court judgment on quantum upheld.
  • Costs to Respondents as per scale.