ANANDA DHARMALINGAM CHANTELLA HONEYBEE SARGON

ANANDA DHARMALINGAM CHANTELLA HONEYBEE SARGON

Taxation of a bill of costs is a proceeding within the meaning of the Limitation Act, but the petition was not time‑barred because the claimant took reasonable steps (initial filing at the Court of Appeal and reliance on interlocutory proceedings and CoA directions) within the limitation window; the Deputy Registrar’s global approach to taxation was mostly correct for ancillary petitions but underestimated the extent, difficulty and volume of work for JS837 — the High Court substituted an increased taxed amount and allowed interest at 5% p.a. from 16.1.2019 until full payment.

Citation
S8-33-837-2000, S8-33-1588-2005 & S8-33-954-2006 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: Ananda Dharmalingam; Respondent: Chantella Honeybee Sargon; Solicitor/claimant (party to Be Paid Taxed Costs): Chew Swee Yoke; Respondent/taxing Party (firm Responsible for Payment): Kamarudin & Partners
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 January 2019
Case Number
S8-33-837-2000, S8-33-1588-2005 & S8-33-954-2006 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Separation and Divorce Proceedings With Taxation of Solicitors' Bills / Judgment on Appeals From Taxation (high Court Judgment)
Outcome
Appeals by Kamarudin & Partners dismissed; claimant Ms Chew’s appeals against Deputy Registrar partially allowed in part and supplemented by High Court adjustment
Legal Topics
Taxation of Bills of Costs, Limitation Period for Taxation, Recovery of Solicitor's Costs, Jurisdiction to Order Taxation, Interest on Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Legal Profession Law Civil Procedure Costs Taxation Limitation Law Taxation of Bills of Costs Limitation Period for Taxation Recovery of Solicitor's Costs +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 7 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ananda Dharmalingam

Petitioner

Chantella Honeybee Sargon

Respondent

Chew Swee Yoke

Solicitor/claimant (party to Be Paid Taxed Costs)

Kamarudin & Partners

Respondent/taxing Party (firm Responsible for Payment)

Procedural Posture

Judicial Separation and Divorce Proceedings With Taxation of Solicitors' Bills / Judgment on Appeals From Taxation (high Court Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether taxation of a solicitor’s bill is an ‘action’ for limitation purposes
  2. 2 Whether the six‑year limitation under the Limitation Act 1953 barred the Bills of Costs
  3. 3 Whether the High Court order directing taxation in the High Court was valid and binding

Ratio Decidendi

Taxation of a bill of costs is a proceeding within the meaning of the Limitation Act, but the petition was not time‑barred because the claimant took reasonable steps (initial filing at the Court of Appeal and reliance on interlocutory proceedings and CoA directions) within the limitation window; the Deputy Registrar’s global approach to taxation was mostly correct for ancillary petitions but underestimated the extent, difficulty and volume of work for JS837 — the High Court substituted an increased taxed amount and allowed interest at 5% p.a. from 16.1.2019 until full payment.

Court Disposition

Appeals by Kamarudin & Partners dismissed; claimant Ms Chew’s appeals against Deputy Registrar partially allowed in part and supplemented by High Court adjustment

Orders

  • Total taxed costs allowed RM300000.00 (breakdown: RM280000.00 for JS837; RM12000.00 for DP1588; RM8000.00 for DP954)
  • Deduct sum previously paid RM46000.00 from the awarded costs leaving RM254000.00 payable to Chew Swee Yoke