Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Duplicity/multiplicity of proceedings

Legal area

Court

8 Nov 2023

1. ) CHAN SEI YONG 2. ) LIONEL KHOO TIONG GIAW 3. ) FU SEK JIN JKI DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

Citation

BB-B52NCvC-17-02/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BB-B52NCvC-17-02/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court concluded the plaintiffs' session court writ duplicated and conflicted with the earlier pending High Court judicial review on identical facts and reliefs; because the outcome of the judicial review would determine the legal basis for the LAD claims and potentially render inconsistent decisions, the writ constituted an abuse of process under Order 18 r.19(1) and was therefore struck out. Costs of RM3,000 were awarded to the defendant.
31 Oct 2023

GAINHILL MARKETING SDN. BHD. PDC AUTO (KUANTAN) SDN. BHD.

Citation

CA-22NCvC-23-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CA-22NCvC-23-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The pleadings disclose no reasonable cause of action because the SPA of 16/4/2012 is clear and excludes reliance on representations (clause 15), the Plaintiff failed to plead essential particulars of the alleged representation, and the claim duplicates prior proceedings; accordingly the claim is obviously unsustainable and must be struck out under O.18 r.19(1)(a),(b) and (d).
29 May 2023

TAN KIM SONG 1. ) HONG JOH AN 2. ) TETUAN TEH KIM TEH, SALINA & CO 3. ) CIMB ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD

Citation

JA-22NCvC-9-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-9-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court struck out the Plaintiff's High Court proceedings as duplicative of pending Sessions Court proceedings and an abuse of process under Order 18 r19(1)(d) KKM 2012, relying on inconsistent pleadings, procedural non-compliance and the principle against multiplicity of actions; accordingly D1's and D2's strike out applications were allowed with costs and the Plaintiff's chamber applications were dismissed for procedural non-compliance and misuse of Order 14A/92.
8 Mar 2023

Srijang Indah Sdn Bhd Royel Department Stores Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-12B-98-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-98-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Shah Alam originating summons (Shah Alam Suit No.6) is a duplicative action of the earlier Kuala Lumpur suit (KL Suit No.441) because the parties, subject matter, and principal reliefs substantially overlap; exercising the court's discretion under the Courts of Judicature Act and Rules of Court, the proper remedy is to strike out the Shah Alam suit (under O.18 r.19) rather than stay it, with a specific clarification that the striking out does not operate as res judicata to the KL Suit No.441.

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) CHAN SEI YONG 2. ) LIONEL KHOO TIONG GIAW 3. ) FU SEK JIN JKI DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD

GAINHILL MARKETING SDN. BHD. PDC AUTO (KUANTAN) SDN. BHD.

TAN KIM SONG 1. ) HONG JOH AN 2. ) TETUAN TEH KIM TEH, SALINA & CO 3. ) CIMB ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD

Srijang Indah Sdn Bhd Royel Department Stores Sdn Bhd