YAW FUN FUN 1. KETUA POLIS DAERAH GOMBAK, SELANGOR 2. KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA LUMPUR 3. SARJAN 73702 SHAHRUL ZAMAN 4. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

YAW FUN FUN 1. KETUA POLIS DAERAH GOMBAK, SELANGOR 2. KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA LUMPUR 3. SARJAN 73702 SHAHRUL ZAMAN 4. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

The court held that on the pleaded case and evidence no actionable duty of care was established between the plaintiff and the police/RTD officers; the failure to blacklist the vehicle was a breach of PDRM SOP only and not a statutory duty; there was insufficient proximity or special characteristic to impose a common law duty (Hill principle) and public policy disfavors extending negligence liability in these circumstances; the learned Magistrate was not plainly wrong and the appeal is dismissed with costs awarded to respondents.

Citation
WA-11BNCVC-13-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff (sole Proprietor of Perniagaan Smart Power Land): YAW FUN FUN; 1st Respondent / 1st Defendant: KETUA POLIS DAERAH GOMBAK, SELANGOR; 2nd Respondent / 2nd Defendant: KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA LUMPUR; 5th Respondent / 5th Defendant: SARJAN 73702 SHAHRUL ZAMAN; 6th Respondent / 6th Defendant (vicariously Liable): KERAJAAN MALAYSIA; 3rd Defendant (appeal / Lower Court): MUHAMAD AMIN YAP BIN ABDULLAH; 4th Defendant (registered Prior Owner): AHMAD TARMIZI BIN MOHAMAD NORI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 April 2019
Case Number
WA-11BNCVC-13-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Magistrates' Court (negligence Claim) / High Court Judgment on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Statutory Duty Vs SOP, Vicarious Liability, Vehicle Blacklisting / KOMPOL / RTD Registration, Costs and Appeals
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Negligence Administrative / Public Law Police Law Motor Vehicle Registration Law Civil Procedure Duty of Care Statutory Duty Vs SOP Vicarious Liability +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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YAW FUN FUN

Appellant / Plaintiff (sole Proprietor of Perniagaan Smart Power Land)

KETUA POLIS DAERAH GOMBAK, SELANGOR

1st Respondent / 1st Defendant

KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN PENGANGKUTAN JALAN WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA LUMPUR

2nd Respondent / 2nd Defendant

SARJAN 73702 SHAHRUL ZAMAN

5th Respondent / 5th Defendant

KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

6th Respondent / 6th Defendant (vicariously Liable)

MUHAMAD AMIN YAP BIN ABDULLAH

3rd Defendant (appeal / Lower Court)

AHMAD TARMIZI BIN MOHAMAD NORI

4th Defendant (registered Prior Owner)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Magistrates' Court (negligence Claim) / High Court Judgment on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether D1, D2 and D5 owed a common law duty of care to the plaintiff when processing/blacklisting a vehicle reported missing
  2. 2 Whether failure to blacklist the vehicle amounted to negligence or merely breach of PDRM SOP
  3. 3 Whether any statutory duty to blacklist existed such that statutory negligence arises

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that on the pleaded case and evidence no actionable duty of care was established between the plaintiff and the police/RTD officers; the failure to blacklist the vehicle was a breach of PDRM SOP only and not a statutory duty; there was insufficient proximity or special characteristic to impose a common law duty (Hill principle) and public policy disfavors extending negligence liability in these circumstances; the learned Magistrate was not plainly wrong and the appeal is dismissed with costs awarded to respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs of RM6,000 awarded to the respondents (subject to allocatur).