Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs orders

Legal area

Court

1 Dec 2025

1. ) GOH MON CHIUAN 2. ) SONNY YEOW KENG WAN 1. ) TOKOH AGRO SDN. BHD. 2. ) LIM SAU CHONG

Citation

JA-22NCvC-52-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-52-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

CELO and all advocates practising under it were disqualified because (i) CELO had a prior retainer for the corporate client in the same series of transactions (PU 2022, BEA, CA), (ii) CELO and Datuk CE possessed privileged and potentially material information and had acknowledged holding privileged communications, (iii) there was a real probability Datuk CE would be a material witness, and (iv) those facts created a real risk of conflict of interest and perceptible misuse of confidential information contrary to Kaedah 3, 5 and 28 and the court's inherent jurisdiction; separately, Shah was gra…
4 Nov 2025

TETUAN KRISH MANIAM & CO Sarawak Cable Berhad PENCELAH 1. ) Leader Cable Industry Bhd (Dalam Likuidasi) 2. ) Universal Cable (M) Berhad (Dalam Likuidasi) 3. ) MAHMUD ABU BEKIR TAIB PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) Hong Leong Islamic Bank Berhad 2. ) AmB

Citation

WA-28JM-21-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28JM-21-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found that (i) the Balance Retention Sum was subject to a Quistclose-type trust in favour of the SCB Financiers by analogy with PECD and equitable considerations of unconscionability, and (ii) the RA and ASA evidenced an intention to create an express (contractual) trust or ring-fence incoming funds into the Escrow Account; accordingly the IJM was directed to pay the Balance Retention Sum into the Escrow Account and Enclosure 51 was dismissed while Enclosure 135 was allowed with costs orders.
31 Jul 2025

ALTRATEC SDN BHD 1. ) THONG YOUNG KOON 2. ) THIAGU A/L NYANASELAN 3. ) CHELVEE A/P MARIMUTHOO 4. ) Tetuan Pushpalingam, Kasmani & Partners 5. ) Kasmani Bt Baharuddin 6. ) Krishnan, Puspalingam 7. ) Ragunath A/l Kesavan 8. ) PENGARAH TANAH D

Citation

BA-23NCvC-60-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-23NCvC-60-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found Altratec was deprived of access due to obstruction and Thong had contractual liability under the Supplementary Agreement but non-delivery was not solely Thong’s fault; taking account of prior payments (RM330,000) and conduct, the fair remedy is to award Altratec RM10,000 per month without interest payable by Thong from the date of judgment until full vacant possession is delivered; Thiagu and Chelvee must remove obstructions and bear demolition/removal costs; counterclaims against D7 and the solicitors were dismissed for lack of merit.
11 May 2025

XXXX 1. ) AHMAD MURSYIDIN BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) YAYASAN ISLAM TERENGGANU

Citation

TA-B53-1-01/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

TA-B53-1-01/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The application to file additional witness list and additional document bundle was dismissed because defendants failed to show due diligence and provided an unreasonable 18-month delay between joint bundle filing and the application; the additional witness was known or discoverable earlier from existing police reports and exhibits, the application constituted an afterthought made after plaintiff witnesses had been examined, and allowing it would prejudice the plaintiff and undermine PTCM objectives under Order 34. The court exercised its discretion to refuse the application and awarded costs…
28 Apr 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN LEGASI SENADA SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN MUHAMMAD ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

WA-29NCC-1040-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1040-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because issue estoppel (res judicata in the wider sense) barred the Judgment Debtor from re‑raising issues that were or could have been raised in earlier proceedings; alternatively the substantive challenges lacked merit because solicitors were authorised to request the bankruptcy notice and the petition signed by the director was validly presented despite absence of seal endorsement. The appeal therefore amounted to an abuse of process.
22 Apr 2025

XTREME MERIDIAN SDN BHD 1. ) TRIBUNAL TUNTUTAN PEMBELI RUMAH 2. ) Muhammad Hariz Bin Md Azman

Citation

W-01(A)-574-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

A
Case number

W-01(A)-574-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court affirmed the High Court and Tribunal: the Tribunal's Technical Report and evidence supported the factual finding that defects existed; the SPA (contextual reading of '/') required both cabinet and vanity top; the appellant failed to rectify within the contractual 30 days and therefore the purchaser was entitled to carry out works and recover reasonable costs; no error of law, irrationality or procedural impropriety was shown; appeal dismissed.
5 Mar 2025

PEMPETISYEN LEE LENG CHAN 1. ) ADDEKOH SDN BHD 2. ) KOH SIONG CHOON 3. ) WONG SOH LING

Citation

WA-28NCC-94-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-94-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the company’s sole substratum (sole distributorship) had failed resulting in zero sales; that failure alone satisfies the just and equitable ground under s465(1)(b) CA 2016. Independent corroborative finding of a breakdown of mutual trust consistent with quasi‑partnership features reinforces the conclusion that winding‑up is appropriate. The court therefore ordered the company wound up and the Official Receiver appointed as liquidator and awarded costs to the petitioner.
20 Jan 2025

Khor Yong Yong (Liquidator Of Shigen Polycolor Sdn. Bhd. (In Liquidation) [Company No: 200101031179 (566938-x)] 1. ) TAN KHENG GUAN 2. ) CHU KOK KHING 3. ) EE GENG CHOON

Citation

PA-28PW-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-28PW-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Where a court-appointed liquidator has performed liquidation duties while his appointment was in effect he is entitled to fair and reasonable remuneration and reimbursement of expenses for that period even if the winding up order is later set aside; professionals appointed by the liquidator may be paid as part of those expenses; liability to pay is imposed on the losing party in the underlying winding up petition (shareholder who loses), not the company.
27 Dec 2024

1. ) Graceful Frontier Sdn Bhd 2. ) Everest Landmark Sdn Bhd 3. ) Teoh Kiang Hong 4. ) Ong Bee Lee Theow Say Kow @ Teoh Kiang Seng, Henry

Citation

02(f)-25-04/2021(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

02(f)-25-04/2021(P) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Federal Court held appeals should be allowed: there is no entrenched statutory two-stage procedure for in-trial recantation and recantation must be assessed with care; Khoon Chye Hin principles apply to recantation scrutiny; where forgery is alleged the party asserting forgery bears the onus to prove it; an attesting solicitor/party is not automatically an unreliable witness and his evidence must be weighed with other evidence; expert evidence weight is determined by methodology and materials (not payment). The Court set aside Court of Appeal decisions and affirmed the High Court findings tha…
21 Oct 2024

CHUA ZHEN HONG NG ENG HUAT

Citation

BA-12A-23-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12A-23-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court's exercise of discretion to transfer the Magistrates' Court action to the Sessions Court because the Amended Statement of Claim sought reliefs outside the Magistrates' Court's jurisdiction; although there was delay and multiple interlocutory applications by both parties, those factors did not outweigh the need to have the matter heard by the court with proper jurisdiction; the Sessions Court order is therefore upheld with costs in the cause.