Mohd Naza Bin Osman Ali ( Kedua) Nylex Polymer Marketing S/B

Mohd Naza Bin Osman Ali ( Kedua) Nylex Polymer Marketing S/B

The High Court held the Sessions Court rightly exercised its discretion in permitting withdrawal of the application but denying liberty to file afresh because the appellant had inordinately delayed (about three years), failed to comply with directions to file an affidavit in reply, offered no reasonable or satisfactory explanation for withdrawal, and withdrawal with liberty would prejudice the respondent and risk abuse of process.

Citation
BA-12ANCC-6-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/2nd Defendant: Mohd Naza bin Osman Ali; Respondent/plaintiff: Nylex Polymer Marketing Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 April 2021
Case Number
BA-12ANCC-6-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Notice of Application, Judgment in Default of Appearance, Leave to Discontinue, Abuse of Process, Delay and Prejudice
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Enforcement and Remedies Withdrawal of Notice of Application Judgment in Default of Appearance Leave to Discontinue Abuse of Process Delay and Prejudice

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd Naza bin Osman Ali

Appellant/2nd Defendant

Nylex Polymer Marketing Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court properly exercised its discretion to allow withdrawal of the notice of application but refuse liberty to file afresh
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's inordinate delay and failure to comply with directions justified refusal of liberty to file afresh
  3. 3 Whether permitting withdrawal with liberty would prejudice the respondent or amount to an abuse of court process

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the Sessions Court rightly exercised its discretion in permitting withdrawal of the application but denying liberty to file afresh because the appellant had inordinately delayed (about three years), failed to comply with directions to file an affidavit in reply, offered no reasonable or satisfactory explanation for withdrawal, and withdrawal with liberty would prejudice the respondent and risk abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to respondent in the sum of RM 2,000.00