LOW HOCK JOO CHONG KOK MING

LOW HOCK JOO CHONG KOK MING

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: naming the respondent as a third defendant by way of counterclaim amounted to joinder of parties which required prior leave under Order 15 rule 4 Rules of Court 2012; the reliefs claimed in the counterclaim were not sufficiently connected to the principal claim to justify joinder via counterclaim under Order 15 rule 3; accordingly the counterclaim was properly struck out and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
BA-12ANCvC-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant; Defendant in Original Action; Counter Claimant: Low Hock Joo; Respondent; Third Party Defendant: Chong Kok Ming; Plaintiff in Original Action: Tenaga Nasional Berhad; Second Defendant / Named Party in Related Counterclaim Proceedings: Cheah Kian Giap
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 July 2024
Case Number
BA-12ANCvC-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court Decision / Interlocutory Appeal Against Order Striking Out Counterclaim / Joinder Issue
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; Sessions Court order striking out counterclaim affirmed
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Counterclaim Against Additional Parties, Order 15 Rules 3 and 4 Rules of Court 2012, Sufficiency of Connection Between Reliefs, Leave to Add Parties
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Court Rules Joinder of Parties Counterclaim Amendment of Pleadings Counterclaim Against Additional Parties Order 15 Rules 3 and 4 Rules of Court 2012 Sufficiency of Connection Between Reliefs +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Low Hock Joo

Appellant; Defendant in Original Action; Counter Claimant

Chong Kok Ming

Respondent; Third Party Defendant

Tenaga Nasional Berhad

Plaintiff in Original Action

Cheah Kian Giap

Second Defendant / Named Party in Related Counterclaim Proceedings

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court Decision / Interlocutory Appeal Against Order Striking Out Counterclaim / Joinder Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether naming respondent as third defendant by way of counterclaim was procedurally proper
  2. 2 Whether the relief claimed in the counterclaim was sufficiently connected to the principal claim to permit joinder via counterclaim under Order 15 r3
  3. 3 Whether permission of the Court under Order 15 r4 was required to join the respondent as a party

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: naming the respondent as a third defendant by way of counterclaim amounted to joinder of parties which required prior leave under Order 15 rule 4 Rules of Court 2012; the reliefs claimed in the counterclaim were not sufficiently connected to the principal claim to justify joinder via counterclaim under Order 15 rule 3; accordingly the counterclaim was properly struck out and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; Sessions Court order striking out counterclaim affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Order of the Sessions Court allowing respondent's application to strike out the counterclaim is affirmed