TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD Tan Li Hua

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD Tan Li Hua

Appellate court concluded the trial judge erred in rejecting the licensee's technician evidence and Exhibit P1. The court accepted that SP1 and SP2 were competent, that physical signs of tampering and calibrated test results established meter interference on a balance of probabilities, and that the s.38(4) certified statement provided prima facie proof of the claimed quantum. Defendant failed to rebut the estimate; appeal allowed and defendant ordered to pay RM207,932.65 plus costs RM7,000.00.

Citation
PA-12BNCvC-23-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Tenaga Nasional Berhad; Respondent/defendant: Tan Li Hua
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 August 2024
Case Number
PA-12BNCvC-23-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment entered for appellant Tenaga Nasional Berhad
Legal Topics
Meter Tampering, Backbilling, Evidence and Burden of Proof, Section 38 Electricity Supply Act 1990, Calculation of Loss, Appellate Review Standard
Source Language
Malay/English
Energy/utilities Law Civil Litigation Statutory Remedies Meter Tampering Backbilling Evidence and Burden of Proof Section 38 Electricity Supply Act 1990 Calculation of Loss +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tenaga Nasional Berhad

Appellant/plaintiff

Tan Li Hua

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (high Court) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether meter tampering at the defendant's premises was proven on the balance of probabilities
  2. 2 Whether the claimed quantum of RM207,932.65 for unrecorded electricity consumption was sufficiently proven and admissible under s.38(4) ESA 1990
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge was plainly wrong in rejecting the licensee's evidence and s.38(4) statement

Ratio Decidendi

Appellate court concluded the trial judge erred in rejecting the licensee's technician evidence and Exhibit P1. The court accepted that SP1 and SP2 were competent, that physical signs of tampering and calibrated test results established meter interference on a balance of probabilities, and that the s.38(4) certified statement provided prima facie proof of the claimed quantum. Defendant failed to rebut the estimate; appeal allowed and defendant ordered to pay RM207,932.65 plus costs RM7,000.00.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment entered for appellant Tenaga Nasional Berhad

Orders

  • Defendant Tan Li Hua to pay Tenaga Nasional Berhad RM207,932.65
  • Defendant to pay costs to appellant in the sum of RM7,000.00