Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Evidence evaluation

  • 22 Mar 2024

    [Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] NURUL SYAFIQAH BINTI ABDULLAH SANI

    Citation
    BF-83-351-07/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    BF-83-351-07/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution failed to eliminate reasonable doubt because defence raised a plausible alternative causation (animal crossing and tyre failure) that was not effectively challenged, there were no independent eyewitnesses or CCTV, forensic evidence permitted other causes and the victim's insecure position on the mother's lap materially contributed to death; therefore prosecution did not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and accused must be acquitted under the applicable procedural provisions.

  • 5 Feb 2024

    [ ] UDI ANAK AMBO

    Citation
    Q-05(LB)-351-09/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    LB
    Case number
    Q-05(LB)-351-09/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    The Court held the prosecution proved all elements of murder under paragraph 300(c) and that R1 and R2 acted in furtherance of a common intention; respondents failed on the balance of probabilities to establish private defence because the parang had been seized and the apprehension of danger had ceased, making the subsequent multiple stabbings excessive and unnecessary. The purported defect in the charge (wrong date) was remedied by an oral amendment in court without prejudice, so the charge was not fatal.

  • 6 Jul 2022

    THEAN HEONG SAUCE MAKER 1. ) MAHKAMAH PERUSAHAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) Woo Choon Keet

    Citation
    AA-25-35-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-25-35-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The Industrial Court's award was quashed because the learned Chairman failed to consider critical and corroborative evidence (security guards' testimony and police attendance) showing aggressive conduct on 3 Feb 2020; that conduct amounted to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal, and the omission to evaluate that evidence rendered the IC decision irrational and Wednesbury unreasonable.

  • 26 Sept 2019

    NORZIHAN BINTI ZAINAL ABIDIN

    Citation
    WA-42K-12-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-42K-12-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court allowed the accuseds' appeals and set aside convictions and sentences because the prosecution failed to prove the charges as framed: the evidence showed the honours were conferred by PKDRK (a society) not by the State of Kelantan as alleged in the charges, several victims acknowledged the titles were PKDRK titles or that they dealt with intermediaries, and the trial judge failed to properly consider victims' evidence negating deception and culpability; accordingly prosecution did not prove dishonesty/common intention required under s420 Penal Code.