MOHD NASRI BIN HANIF 1. ) MOHAMAD ADAM BIN HASHIM 2. ) HASHIM BIN SAIYA

MOHD NASRI BIN HANIF 1. ) MOHAMAD ADAM BIN HASHIM 2. ) HASHIM BIN SAIYA

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff's consistent pleaded, oral and contemporaneous evidence was more inherently probable; the First Defendant was negligent in encroaching into the Plaintiff's lane causing the collision; the Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent; damages were assessed per specific heads and awarded in full against the Defendants with interest and costs to follow.

Citation
BL-A53KJ-466-11/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohd Nasri Bin Hanif; First Defendant: Mohammad Adam Bin Hashim; Second Defendant: Hashim Bin Saiya
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 January 2026
Case Number
BL-A53KJ-466-11/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Civil Motor Vehicle Collision (negligence) / Judgment (sessions Court)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed in full; liability 100% against the Defendants; costs awarded to Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Quantum of Damages, Burden of Proof, Expert Medical Evidence, Interest and Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Road Traffic Law Personal Injury Evidence Negligence Contributory Negligence Quantum of Damages Burden of Proof +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd Nasri Bin Hanif

Plaintiff

Mohammad Adam Bin Hashim

First Defendant

Hashim Bin Saiya

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Motor Vehicle Collision (negligence) / Judgment (sessions Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant was negligent and caused the collision
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff was contributorily negligent
  3. 3 Quantum of general and special damages including future surgeries

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff's consistent pleaded, oral and contemporaneous evidence was more inherently probable; the First Defendant was negligent in encroaching into the Plaintiff's lane causing the collision; the Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent; damages were assessed per specific heads and awarded in full against the Defendants with interest and costs to follow.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed in full; liability 100% against the Defendants; costs awarded to Plaintiff

Orders

  • Damages awarded as assessed in the judgment in favour of the Plaintiff against the Defendants jointly and severally
  • Interest on general damages at 5% per annum from date of service of writ to date of decision