Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Adjournment and prejudice

Legal area

Court

5 Apr 2021

PREMIUM PARK DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 867102-U) RIGHT BASE TRADING SDN BHD (COMPANY NO.: 211318-K)

Citation

JB-22NCvC-32-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-22NCvC-32-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed because Defendant failed to show a satisfactory explanation for omitting the four witnesses from its pre-trial list, the application was late and likely tactical, the proposed evidence related to matters already known on the pleadings rather than new circumstances, and allowing the witnesses would prejudice the Plaintiff; accordingly the court refused to exercise its discretion to permit late witnesses.
5 Dec 2019

ZAINURIN BIN JOHARI

Citation

WA-41LB-15-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-41LB-15-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the prosecution appeals: it found the Magistrate acted within her judicial discretion under section 254 CPC to acquit and discharge the accused because the prosecution repeatedly failed to produce the victim and gave no satisfactory explanation after prolonged delay causing prejudice; further the appeals were incompetent because the High Court was obliged by section 95(3) of the Child Act 2001 to deliver its final decision within 12 months of the notice of appeal and that period had elapsed, rendering the appeal procedurally barred.