Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Estoppel (s.115 evidence act)

Legal area

Court

19 Mar 2023

1. ) TEH SWEE NEO 2. ) LEE YONG HEN 1. ) CCRM MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. 2. ) CAPITAL CITY PROPERTY SDN. BHD.

Citation

JA-22NCvC-160-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-160-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Court found D1 admittedly failed to pay rent as required by the TA; the TA and related documents authorized D1 to deduct/offset charges but D1 never paid rent or discharged obligations; evidence and surrounding documents showed D2 prepared and controlled the project and the TA terms and D1 was a nominal vehicle controlled by D2; special circumstances existed to lift the corporate veil and make D2 jointly liable with D1; Plaintiffs had standing to sue as representatives under O.15 r.12 ROC; accordingly Plaintiffs' claim was allowed and Defendants' countercla…
14 Jan 2020

AIA BERHAD DR TAN SIEW HUI

Citation

PA-12ANCVC-37-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12ANCVC-37-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court allowed the appeal because the Learned Sessions Court Judge erred in bypassing the procedural first stage under Order 33 r.2 and deciding the substantive applicability of Exclusion Clause 14 without giving directions and without hearing the issue proper; estoppel allegations require extrinsic factual evidence obtainable at trial and the applicability of the exclusion involves factual issues that cannot be determined summarily, so the Sessions Court order and subsequent proceedings including assessment of damages were set aside and the matter remitted for ordinary trial.
14 Jan 2020

AIA BERHAD DR TAN SIEW HUI

Citation

PA-12ANCVC-37-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12ANCVC-37-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court allowed the appellant's appeal because the Sessions Court erred procedurally by bypassing the required two-stage approach under Order 33 r.2 (ordering and directing a preliminary issue hearing) and by deciding liability on the merits without affording the parties an opportunity to present extrinsic evidence; the estoppel defence alleged by respondent required trial evidence and the matter must proceed to trial; accordingly the Sessions Court order and subsequent proceedings including the assessment of damages were set aside.

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) TEH SWEE NEO 2. ) LEE YONG HEN 1. ) CCRM MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. 2. ) CAPITAL CITY PROPERTY SDN. BHD.

AIA BERHAD DR TAN SIEW HUI

AIA BERHAD DR TAN SIEW HUI