ATE SOLUTION SDN. BHD. PHARN KAI YEE

ATE SOLUTION SDN. BHD. PHARN KAI YEE

Defendant's application was allowed because the disputed documents were owned by the defendant or her sole proprietorship and were obtained without her permission; plaintiff failed to explain how the documents were obtained or to follow the proper discovery/interrogatory procedures, and the court exercised its discretion under Rule 92(4) to prevent prejudice and abuse of process while noting that admissibility of illegally obtained evidence does not obviate the need for correct procedural routes and does not guarantee weight at trial.

Citation
BB-B52NCC-69-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff: ATE SOLUTION SDN. BHD.; Defendant: PHARN KAI YEE
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 August 2023
Case Number
BB-B52NCC-69-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Civil Writ of Summons / Interlocutory Appeal (decision on Defendant's Application to Expunge Documents)
Outcome
Defendant's Notice of Application (Annex 13) allowed
Legal Topics
Discovery and Disclosure, Admissibility of Illegally Obtained Evidence, Expungement of Documents, Burden of Proof, Interlocutory Relief
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Evidence Law Company Law Employment Law/fiduciary Duties Discovery and Disclosure Admissibility of Illegally Obtained Evidence Expungement of Documents Burden of Proof +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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ATE SOLUTION SDN. BHD.

Plaintiff

PHARN KAI YEE

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Writ of Summons / Interlocutory Appeal (decision on Defendant's Application to Expunge Documents)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents allegedly belonging to defendant and obtained without permission should be expunged from plaintiff's bundle
  2. 2 Whether the documents are relevant to the plaintiff's pleaded cause of action
  3. 3 Whether illegally obtained documents are admissible in civil proceedings and what weight they carry

Ratio Decidendi

Defendant's application was allowed because the disputed documents were owned by the defendant or her sole proprietorship and were obtained without her permission; plaintiff failed to explain how the documents were obtained or to follow the proper discovery/interrogatory procedures, and the court exercised its discretion under Rule 92(4) to prevent prejudice and abuse of process while noting that admissibility of illegally obtained evidence does not obviate the need for correct procedural routes and does not guarantee weight at trial.

Court Disposition

Defendant's Notice of Application (Annex 13) allowed

Orders

  • Defendant's Notice of Application (Lampiran 13) is allowed.
  • Costs ordered in cause.