ASHRAF BIN SHAHRIR 1. ) YAP CHIEW YAN 2. ) LASRUM 3. ) METALPLAS SDN BHD

ASHRAF BIN SHAHRIR 1. ) YAP CHIEW YAN 2. ) LASRUM 3. ) METALPLAS SDN BHD

The application to amend the defence was dismissed because the proposed amendment sought to withdraw a material admission and would change the character of the action, was made after an unexplained nine-month delay without objective supporting evidence, would cause substantive prejudice to the Plaintiff that cannot be remedied by costs, and was not made bona fide.

Citation
WA-A73KJ-287-02/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Plaintiff: Ashraf bin Shahrir; Defendant First: Yap Chiew Yan; Defendant Second: Lasrum; Defendant Third: Metalplas Sdn Bhd
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Case Number
WA-A73KJ-287-02/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Civil Road Traffic Accident Claim / Interlocutory Application to Amend Defence Under Order 20 Rule 5
Outcome
Application to amend defence by Defendant First dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Withdrawal of Admission, Prejudice, Delay, Bona Fide Requirement, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Tort Road Traffic Accidents Evidence Amendment of Pleadings Withdrawal of Admission Prejudice Delay +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashraf bin Shahrir

Plaintiff

Yap Chiew Yan

Defendant First

Lasrum

Defendant Second

Metalplas Sdn Bhd

Defendant Third

Procedural Posture

Civil Road Traffic Accident Claim / Interlocutory Application to Amend Defence Under Order 20 Rule 5

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment withdraws a material admission
  2. 2 Whether the application was made bona fide
  3. 3 Whether the delay in applying was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend the defence was dismissed because the proposed amendment sought to withdraw a material admission and would change the character of the action, was made after an unexplained nine-month delay without objective supporting evidence, would cause substantive prejudice to the Plaintiff that cannot be remedied by costs, and was not made bona fide.

Court Disposition

Application to amend defence by Defendant First dismissed

Orders

  • Application to amend defence dismissed by Magistrate Court
  • Costs of RM1,000.00 awarded to Plaintiff to be paid by Defendant First