1. ) SITI NURSHAFIKAH BINTI ZULKIFLI 2. ) MUHAMMAD AL-RASYIDIN BIN MAT ANAFI 1. ) MOHAMAD AZRUL BIN MOHD LOKMAN 2. ) HERN YI ANG ENTERPRISE

1. ) SITI NURSHAFIKAH BINTI ZULKIFLI 2. ) MUHAMMAD AL-RASYIDIN BIN MAT ANAFI 1. ) MOHAMAD AZRUL BIN MOHD LOKMAN 2. ) HERN YI ANG ENTERPRISE

The appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed because section 28(1)(c) of the Court of Judicature Act 1964, as amended by the Courts of Judicature (Amendment) Act 2022, bars appeals to the High Court against subordinate court decisions dismissing applications to strike out pleadings; the amendment applies and removes the High Court's jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal, therefore the appeal is dismissed in limine.

Citation
JA-12A-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/third Party: SITI NURSHAFIKAH BINTI ZULKIFLI; Appellant/third Party: MUHAMMAD AL-RASYIDIN BIN MAT ANAFI; Respondent/defendant/third Party Applicant: MOHAMAD AZRUL BIN MOHD LOKMAN; Respondent/defendant/third Party Applicant: HERN YI ANG ENTERPRISE; Plaintiff: ROSLAN BIN SIDEK; Plaintiff: TRANSNASIONAL EXPRESS SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 September 2025
Case Number
JA-12A-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appellate Decision on Interlocutory Striking Out Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in limine for being incompetent under s28(1)(c) Court of Judicature Act 1964 as amended
Legal Topics
Third Party Notice, Strike Out, Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012, Appealability Under Court of Judicature Act S28(1)(c), Retrospective Application of Amendment
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Tort Motor Accident Appeals Third Party Notice Strike Out Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012 Appealability Under Court of Judicature Act S28(1)(c) +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SITI NURSHAFIKAH BINTI ZULKIFLI

Appellant/third Party

MUHAMMAD AL-RASYIDIN BIN MAT ANAFI

Appellant/third Party

MOHAMAD AZRUL BIN MOHD LOKMAN

Respondent/defendant/third Party Applicant

HERN YI ANG ENTERPRISE

Respondent/defendant/third Party Applicant

ROSLAN BIN SIDEK

Plaintiff

TRANSNASIONAL EXPRESS SDN BHD

Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appellate Decision on Interlocutory Striking Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear appeal against dismissal of application to strike out third party notices under Order 18 Rule 19 ROC 2012
  2. 2 Whether appeals against orders dismissing applications to strike out pleadings are barred by s28(1)(c) Court of Judicature Act 1964 as amended
  3. 3 Whether third party notices were properly filed and consequential to leave granted on 9 March 2023

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is incompetent and must be dismissed because section 28(1)(c) of the Court of Judicature Act 1964, as amended by the Courts of Judicature (Amendment) Act 2022, bars appeals to the High Court against subordinate court decisions dismissing applications to strike out pleadings; the amendment applies and removes the High Court's jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal, therefore the appeal is dismissed in limine.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in limine for being incompetent under s28(1)(c) Court of Judicature Act 1964 as amended

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs RM7,000 to be taxed and allocated (subject to allocator)