DR ZAKIR ABDUL KARIM NAIK (no. mtpr : 651018-75-5049) RAVEENTHARAN A/L SUBRAMANIAM (no. k/p : 600316-07-5631)

DR ZAKIR ABDUL KARIM NAIK (no. mtpr : 651018-75-5049) RAVEENTHARAN A/L SUBRAMANIAM (no. k/p : 600316-07-5631)

Transfer was ordered because the defendant satisfied at least one s.23(1) CJA criterion (residence/place of business and location of publication in Penang), the defendant's witnesses and evidential nexus are in Penang, and the plaintiff's affidavit failed to provide probative evidence that the cause arose exclusively in Putrajaya; convenience and legislative intent favour trial in Penang under Order 57 r.1(4).

Citation
WA-23CY-69-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Dr Zakir Abdul Karim Naik; Defendant/respondent: Raveentharan A/L Subramaniam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 July 2020
Case Number
WA-23CY-69-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil – Transfer Application and Appeal / Order Allowing Transfer to High Court Penang; Proceedings Stayed Pending Appeal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application to transfer venue allowed
Legal Topics
Venue Transfer, Cause of Action, Territorial Jurisdiction, Order 57 Rule 1 Rules of Court 2012, Section 23(1) Court of Judicature Act 1964
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Defamation Jurisdictional Law Internet/media Law Venue Transfer Cause of Action Territorial Jurisdiction Order 57 Rule 1 Rules of Court 2012 +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Zakir Abdul Karim Naik

Plaintiff/appellant

Raveentharan A/L Subramaniam

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil – Transfer Application and Appeal / Order Allowing Transfer to High Court Penang; Proceedings Stayed Pending Appeal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court at Kuala Lumpur or Penang has territorial jurisdiction under s.23(1) CJA
  2. 2 Whether cause of action for online defamation arises where the statement was published or where it was accessed
  3. 3 Whether defendant's residence/place of business and location of publication justify transfer under Order 57 r.1(4)

Ratio Decidendi

Transfer was ordered because the defendant satisfied at least one s.23(1) CJA criterion (residence/place of business and location of publication in Penang), the defendant's witnesses and evidential nexus are in Penang, and the plaintiff's affidavit failed to provide probative evidence that the cause arose exclusively in Putrajaya; convenience and legislative intent favour trial in Penang under Order 57 r.1(4).

Court Disposition

Application to transfer venue allowed

Orders

  • Proceedings transferred to the High Court in Malaya at Penang
  • Costs in the cause