LIM CHONG YEAN KHONG YOKE BEE

LIM CHONG YEAN KHONG YOKE BEE

The appeal is dismissed because the period of trespass was correctly assessed from 22.8.2013 to 24.4.2018 as the issue was res judicata and the High Court decision relied on by appellant had been set aside; under the user principle plaintiff is entitled to reasonable rent without proving actual loss and the Sessions Court correctly accepted plaintiff’s expert valuation of RM577,300; appellate intervention was not warranted as the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong.

Citation
WA-12ANCVC-178-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / 1st Defendant: LIM CHONG YEAN; Respondent / Plaintiff: KHONG YOKE BEE; 2nd Defendant: NEW SOON YEE FRUITS SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 August 2021
Case Number
WA-12ANCVC-178-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Assessment of Damages for Trespass to Land / High Court Appellate Decision on Appeal From Sessions Court Assessment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trespass to Land, Assessment of Damages, Res Judicata, User Principle, Vacant Possession
Source Language
Malay/English
Property Law Tort Civil Procedure Trespass to Land Assessment of Damages Res Judicata User Principle Vacant Possession

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LIM CHONG YEAN

Appellant / 1st Defendant

KHONG YOKE BEE

Respondent / Plaintiff

NEW SOON YEE FRUITS SDN BHD

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Assessment of Damages for Trespass to Land / High Court Appellate Decision on Appeal From Sessions Court Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether period of trespass should run from 22.8.2013 (date of registration) or from 28.7.2016 (Court of Appeal decision)
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff was required to prove actual loss to recover damages for trespass
  3. 3 Whether deductions for expenses/outgoings should reduce the rental-based damages

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the period of trespass was correctly assessed from 22.8.2013 to 24.4.2018 as the issue was res judicata and the High Court decision relied on by appellant had been set aside; under the user principle plaintiff is entitled to reasonable rent without proving actual loss and the Sessions Court correctly accepted plaintiff’s expert valuation of RM577,300; appellate intervention was not warranted as the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to pay costs of RM5,000 to Respondent