Kuganeswaaran A/l Selvam Zainal Bin Tajuddin

Kuganeswaaran A/l Selvam Zainal Bin Tajuddin

The trial judge failed to analyze medical and oral evidence and did not give reasons for quantum awards; appellate intervention was therefore justified to adjust awards where there was no factual or principled justification. Specific reductions and disallowances were made: several injury awards reduced to amounts consistent with authorities and medical evidence, prosthetic future costs subjected to a one‑third contingency deduction, certain special damages disallowed for lack of receipts, overlapping awards (foot drop) set aside, and speculative global loss of earnings wholly disallowed because claimant returned to work and provided no evidence of future loss.

Citation
JB-12BNCvC-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Zainal bin Tajuddin; Respondent/plaintiff: Kuganeswaaran a/l Selvam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 April 2024
Case Number
JB-12BNCvC-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: defendant/appellant's appeal on liability dismissed; appeal on quantum allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Liability, Appellate Review, Special Damages, General Damages, Contingency Deduction, Overlapping Awards
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Personal Injury Civil Procedure Evidence Quantum of Damages Liability Appellate Review Special Damages +3 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zainal bin Tajuddin

Appellant/defendant

Kuganeswaaran a/l Selvam

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellate court should interfere with quantum awarded by trial judge
  2. 2 Appropriate quantum for specified injuries and special damages
  3. 3 Whether trial judge misapprehended facts or failed to analyze medical evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge failed to analyze medical and oral evidence and did not give reasons for quantum awards; appellate intervention was therefore justified to adjust awards where there was no factual or principled justification. Specific reductions and disallowances were made: several injury awards reduced to amounts consistent with authorities and medical evidence, prosthetic future costs subjected to a one‑third contingency deduction, certain special damages disallowed for lack of receipts, overlapping awards (foot drop) set aside, and speculative global loss of earnings wholly disallowed because claimant returned to work and provided no evidence of future loss.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: defendant/appellant's appeal on liability dismissed; appeal on quantum allowed in part.

Orders

  • Right acetabulum fracture award reduced from RM35000.00 to RM30000.00
  • Right L3-L5 transverse process fracture award reduced from RM60000.00 to RM40000.00