MUHAMMAD SHAIFUL AZRIL BIN SAMSOR 1. ) SUPHATTRA A/P VISAL 2. ) THA NETH A/L AH RUN

MUHAMMAD SHAIFUL AZRIL BIN SAMSOR 1. ) SUPHATTRA A/P VISAL 2. ) THA NETH A/L AH RUN

On the balance of probabilities the first defendant negligently caused the accident by making an illegal U-turn into the plaintiff's lawful motorcycle lane in the face of prohibitory signage; the plaintiff discharged the burden of proof with consistent testimony, police report, IO evidence and medical/specialist...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BK-A53KJ-58-02/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff: Muhammad Shaiful Azril bin Samsor; First Defendant: Suphattra a/p Visal; Second Defendant: Tha Neth a/l Ah Run
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 August 2022
Case Number
BK-A53KJ-58-02/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Tort Negligence (road Traffic Accident) / Trial Judgment (sessions Court Decision)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed; first defendant held wholly to blame; defendants ordered to pay damages, interest and costs as set out below
Legal Topics
Liability for Negligent Driving, Contributory Negligence, Burden of Proof, Assessment of General and Special Damages, Future Medical Expenses, Weight of Police Investigator Evidence, Effect of Defendant Not Calling Evidence, Traffic Signage and Statutory Notices
Tort Negligence Road Traffic Law Personal Injury Evidence Liability for Negligent Driving Contributory Negligence Burden of Proof +5 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Shaiful Azril bin Samsor

Plaintiff

Suphattra a/p Visal

First Defendant

Tha Neth a/l Ah Run

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Tort Negligence (road Traffic Accident) / Trial Judgment (sessions Court Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accident was caused by the negligence of the first defendant by making an illegal U-turn
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent and apportionment of liability
  3. 3 Legal effect of defendant electing not to call evidence

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the first defendant negligently caused the accident by making an illegal U-turn into the plaintiff's lawful motorcycle lane in the face of prohibitory signage; the plaintiff discharged the burden of proof with consistent testimony, police report, IO evidence and medical/specialist reports; the first defendant elected not to call evidence and failed to rebut the prima facie case; no contributory negligence was established against the plaintiff; the court awards specific general and special damages (including reasonable future private medical treatments supported by specialist evidence), interest and costs in favour of the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed; first defendant held wholly to blame; defendants ordered to pay damages, interest and costs as set out below

Orders

  • Judgment for Plaintiff Muhammad Shaiful Azril bin Samsor against the Defendants; first defendant Suphattra a/p Visal held wholly liable for the accident
  • General damages awarded RM127000.00