BIOENERGY FORCE SDN BHD 1. ) SANTHIRA SEGARAN A/L IYNAN 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

BIOENERGY FORCE SDN BHD 1. ) SANTHIRA SEGARAN A/L IYNAN 2. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA

Applicant failed to show good and acceptable reasons for inordinate delay; ignorance of the law and solicitor's failings do not justify extension; challenges to Industrial Court awards proceed by appeal under s.33C within 14 days; therefore the application for extension/abridgement was dismissed and costs awarded.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-24-101-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Bioenergy Force Sdn Bhd; First Respondent: Santhira Segaran a/l Iynan; Second Respondent: Mahkamah Perusahaan, Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 April 2025
Case Number
WA-24-101-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Extension of Time to Challenge Industrial Court Award / Judicial Review / Judgment on Originating Summons (application for Extension of Time)
Outcome
Originating Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review Leave, Appeal Against Industrial Court Award, Limitation Periods, Solicitor Negligence, Enforcement Proceedings
Industrial Relations Employment Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Judicial Review Leave Appeal Against Industrial Court Award Limitation Periods +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bioenergy Force Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Santhira Segaran a/l Iynan

First Respondent

Mahkamah Perusahaan, Malaysia

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extension of Time to Challenge Industrial Court Award / Judicial Review / Judgment on Originating Summons (application for Extension of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time should be granted to file judicial review/appeal against the Industrial Court award
  2. 2 Whether ignorance of the award and alleged solicitor's failure constitute a 'good reason' for extension
  3. 3 Whether O.53 r.3(7) Rules of Court applies to challenges to Industrial Court awards after s.33C IRA amendment

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to show good and acceptable reasons for inordinate delay; ignorance of the law and solicitor's failings do not justify extension; challenges to Industrial Court awards proceed by appeal under s.33C within 14 days; therefore the application for extension/abridgement was dismissed and costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Originating Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Originating Summons dismissed
  • Costs of RM5,000.00 awarded to the First Respondent to be paid within 30 days