Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Exemplary and aggravated damages

Legal area

Court

30 May 2025

DATAMICRON SYSTEMS SDN BHD DATAKRAF SOLUTION SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCvC-417-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-417-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found on the balance of probabilities that the Defendant breached the Teaming Agreement and the CIMS Subcontract and was unjustly enriched; s.71 Contracts Act 1950 supports restitution/quantum meruit where a party lawfully performs services for another and is not to be unjustly enriched; contemporaneous records justified acceptance of 1,709 man-days at a reasonable rate of RM1,500 per man-day, producing RM2,563,500 less RM200,000 already paid = RM2,363,500 awarded together with interest and costs; exemplary and aggravated damages were not justified.
19 May 2025

ARUNAKIRI NATHAR A/L KRISNAN 1. ) MARUBENI-ITOCHU STEEL (M) SDN BHD 2. ) ANSHIN PRECISION INDUSTRIES SDN BHD 3. ) S.A.NETWORKS TECHNICAL INDUSTRIES SDN BHD

Citation

B-02(IM)(NCvC)-893-06/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

B-02(IM)(NCvC)-893-06/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal because the High Court erred in considering matters outside the four corners of the Statement of Claim when deciding a strike out under Order 18 r.19(1)(a). Section 31 SOCSO and limitation issues, not pleaded in the Statement of Claim, could not be used to show no reasonable cause of action at that stage; statutory defences such as s.31 must be pleaded or relied on under appropriate strike out provisions. The Statement of Claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action and the matter was remitted for trial/case management.
20 Mar 2024

BETAH BINTI ABAS 1. ) ISMAIL @ RAHMAN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 2. ) MOHAMED JAMIN BIN AWANG CHEK 3. ) PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH KUALA LANGAT 4. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 5. ) Kerajaan Negeri Selangor

Citation

BA-21NCvC-72-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-21NCvC-72-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court held plaintiff established a prima facie case that the Power of Attorney dated 8.11.2005 was not shown to be validly executed and that defendants who relied on it (notably D1 and D2) failed to discharge the onus to prove its validity; mandatory attestation requirements were not complied with and registration did not cure a forged instrument, therefore transfers effected via the impugned PA/Form 14A are void; defendants D2 and D3 were negligent in statutory duties and D4/D5 vicariously liable; plaintiff entitled to remedies for conversion/detinue and to aggravated/exemplary relief as ord…
27 Jul 2023

TIONG JOO TRADING SDN. BHD. 1. ) Lee Shaw Chin @ Lee Kim Leng 2. ) Woo Yoke Keng 3. ) Lee Wee Leng 4. ) Tiong Joo Enterprise Sdn. Bhd.

Citation

M-02(NCvC)(W)-874-05/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

M-02(NCvC)(W)-874-05/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the RM2,000,000 uplift was unauthorised, illegal and void; D1, D2 and D3 failed to show the withdrawal was for a legitimate purpose and breached their duties, therefore they must jointly and severally refund RM2,000,000 to the plaintiff; the trial judge's contrary finding was set aside and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
7 Mar 2023

1. ) MK COOLING SERVICES 2. ) KOK YOKE MEI CHONG KEK FONG

Citation

BA-22NCvC-435-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-435-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to prove on balance of probabilities that the Defendant breached fiduciary duties: court accepted Defendant's evidence that RM18,000 were personal consultancy fees, that introductions to Susej were justified by MKCS reputational/credit issues, and documentary evidence explained the Brand Insights claim; Plaintiffs' special damages were speculative and unproven. However, as Defendant remained partner until 9.10.2019 he is entitled to statutory reliefs: an order for accounts for 2018-2019 and equal division entitlement up to cessation date; Defendant's counterclaim otherwise d…
25 May 2022

1. ) LEING TI KANG 2. ) JOSEPH ANAK NANANG 3. ) CHOO KAY LIN LAU TIAN KIT

Citation

WA-22NCC-679-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-679-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Court found that Leing, Nexgram (NL), NHB and Mazru conspired by unlawful means and abused the court process to attempt to deprive Lau and Spacious Glory of their rights in SG and to frustrate Suit 291 Appeal; plaintiffs proved pecuniary loss and investigatory/legal expenses caused by the conspiracy and were entitled to damages at large, aggravated and exemplary damages and indemnity costs; claims against nominee defendants (Vasudevan, Razali, Joseph) were dismissed for lack of evidence of knowledge or concert.
10 May 2021

XXXX LEE HOON POI

Citation

J-04(W)-610-12/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

J-04(W)-610-12/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the LJC did not err in setting aside the trial court's RM2,000,000 award for a bionic prosthesis and reducing it to RM620,370 for a mechanical prosthesis because the higher award was disproportionate in the overall compensatory scheme given findings on employment, the claimant's post‑accident conduct (resuming then resigning), existing awards for actual and future loss of earnings, lack of sufficient evidence that mechanical options were unsuitable after following recommended remediation, and public policy concerns about precedent; exemplary/aggravated damages were not awarded…
10 Dec 2020

KENSINGTON STRATA MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. (No. Syarikat: 848181-D) BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA PANGSAPURI RIA

Citation

JA – A52 – 47 – 12 / 2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA – A52 – 47 – 12 / 2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court held the 2nd Agreement dated 1/6/2018 was valid and binding; the defendant breached both express contractual terms (contract period, notice requirement, dispute/penalty procedure) and implied mutual resolution terms by terminating the plaintiff with immediate effect contrary to the agreement and its own warning process; plaintiff proved wrongful termination on balance of probabilities and is entitled to outstanding remuneration, damages for the unexpired term, exemplary/aggravated damages and costs.
18 Sept 2019

1. DIRGA NIAGA (SELANGOR) SDN BHD (No. Syarikat: 032926-U) (Dalam likuidasi – Augustine a/l T.K. James sebagai pelikuidasi) 2. AUGUSTINE A/L T.K. JAMES (No. K/P: 570902-10-6061) (Pelikuidasi Dirga Niaga (Selangor) Sdn Bhd) 3. YOGANATHAN A/L

Citation

W-02(NCVC)(W)-1972-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCVC
Case number

W-02(NCVC)(W)-1972-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Appellants (liquidators and agents) knew or ought to have known of plaintiffs' beneficial proprietary rights under settlement agreements, failed to obtain statements of affairs and to form the court-mandated Committee of Inspection, and therefore unlawfully and negligently disposed of plaintiffs' units; the Vesting Order obtained and relied upon was tainted by that breach and could not absolve the appellants; compensatory damages equal to the sale proceeds stand but awards of aggravated and exemplary damages and indemnity costs were unsupported and set aside.
10 Sept 2019

RAJENDIRAN A/L MANICKAM (NO. K/P: 670807-10-6061) VIKNESWARAN A/L MOHAN (NO. K/P: 830713-14-6093) 1. ) PALMAMIDE SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 248395-T) 2. ) KSP MANUFACTURING SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 120900-P)

Citation

B-04(IM)(C)-82-02/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

B-04(IM)(C)-82-02/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the High Court erred in striking out the plaintiffs' common law claims as not plain and obvious; the scope and effect of s31 SOCSO (and interaction with s28A Civil Law Act and deletion of s42) raise factual and legal issues and possible exceptions (notably aggravated/exemplary damages) that require full trial; therefore the strike-out was set aside and the matter remitted to trial.