S-22-215-2007 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

S-22-215-2007 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was partly allowed because the Registrar erred in failing to confine Yeoh's liability to the April 2006 incident as determined by the trial judge and in accepting uncorroborated handwritten receipts and an undated unsigned final BQ as proof of RM382,050 remedial costs and unpaid professional fees. The court substituted legally supported figures based on the accepted IDA Report 2006 (RM294,000 remedial estimate) and confined damages to the applicable period (April 2006–Feb 2007), reduced awards accordingly, set aside unsupported depreciation and excessive rental awards, and adjusted costs and interest as specified.

Citation
S-22-215-2007 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Shanthakumar Santhalingam; 1st Defendant / Counter Claim Plaintiff: Yeoh Eng Kong; 2nd Defendant: Choo Kok Yeow; 3rd Defendant: Syarikat Perumahan Pegawai Kerajaan Sdn Bhd; Defendant (counter Claim): Michele Kwok Mei Lin; Third Party: Fine Alpha (M) Sdn Bhd; Third Party: Gan Pan Weng; Third Party: Saw Ghee Pour
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
31 January 2022
Case Number
S-22-215-2007 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Writ Action – Negligence / Nuisance / Property Dispute; Assessment of Damages / Appeal to Judge in Chambers Against Court Registrar's Assessment of Damages (notice of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Apportionment of Liability, Admissibility of Documentary Evidence, Expert Evidence (order 40 A), Injunctions (ex Parte), Remedial Works Costs, Diminution of Property Value
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Property Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Tax Law Assessment of Damages Apportionment of Liability Admissibility of Documentary Evidence +4 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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shanthakumar Santhalingam

Plaintiff

Yeoh Eng Kong

1st Defendant / Counter Claim Plaintiff

Choo Kok Yeow

2nd Defendant

Syarikat Perumahan Pegawai Kerajaan Sdn Bhd

3rd Defendant

Michele Kwok Mei Lin

Defendant (counter Claim)

Fine Alpha (M) Sdn Bhd

Third Party

Gan Pan Weng

Third Party

Saw Ghee Pour

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Writ Action – Negligence / Nuisance / Property Dispute; Assessment of Damages / Appeal to Judge in Chambers Against Court Registrar's Assessment of Damages (notice of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Registrar failed to confine defendant's liability to the April 2006 incident as ordered by trial judge
  2. 2 Whether Registrar erroneously accepted handwritten payment receipts and uncorroborated billing as proof of remedial works costs
  3. 3 Whether claimant proved diminution in property value within the applicable assessment period

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was partly allowed because the Registrar erred in failing to confine Yeoh's liability to the April 2006 incident as determined by the trial judge and in accepting uncorroborated handwritten receipts and an undated unsigned final BQ as proof of RM382,050 remedial costs and unpaid professional fees. The court substituted legally supported figures based on the accepted IDA Report 2006 (RM294,000 remedial estimate) and confined damages to the applicable period (April 2006–Feb 2007), reduced awards accordingly, set aside unsupported depreciation and excessive rental awards, and adjusted costs and interest as specified.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Set aside Registrar's award of RM186,820.00 for remedial works and substitute with RM123,600.00 (40% of RM294,000.00)
  • Set aside award of RM1,000,000.00 for deficiency/diminution of value of No.45 Property