Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Hearsay

Legal area

Court

5 Jan 2026

LEIKA SDN BHD TM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES SDN BHD (yang telah mengambilalih hak-hak, aset-aset dan liabiliti-liabiliti Telekom Malaysia Berhad melalui Perintah Mahkamah bertarikh 21.2.2023)

Citation

BA-12BNCvC-34-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BNCvC-34-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court’s factual findings—based on the Appellant’s admission of excavation, contemporaneous discovery of cable damage, absence of other excavators, admissible business records and witness evidence—supported an inference under res ipsa loquitur shifting the evidential burden to the Appellant which it failed to rebut; therefore the Appellant was liable and the damages proved on a balance of probabilities and appellate interference was unjustified.
4 Nov 2025

ROSMAINI BIN ABDUL RAOF

Citation

JA-42H-13-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-42H-13-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The trial judge did not err: SP1's in‑court demeanour and testimony were credible; the belated statutory declaration and police report were afterthoughts and contested, did not create reasonably possible alternative hypotheses, and did not break the complete circumstantial chain pointing to the accused; refusal to recall SP1 was a proper exercise of discretion under Section 425 CPC; SP1's testimony was direct evidence and not inadmissible hearsay; alleged investigative defects were immaterial; the 10‑year sentence (with 14 months remand served) was within the appropriate range and not manifes…
31 Jul 2025

[ ] MOHD SHAZNAS BIN MAT NASIR

Citation

DF-82D-6-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DF-82D-6-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case of possession because it did not exclude the possibility of access by other occupants, relied on hearsay statements instead of calling material witnesses (mother and other household members), and depended on police evidence that was weakened by memory lapses after eight years; accordingly the accused was discharged and freed without being called to enter defence.
6 Jun 2025

1. ) SOON PING KIONG 2. ) Miss Prakat Tachan (Thailand) (P)

Citation

BA-45A-43-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-43-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution proved identity and chain of custody of seized drugs; defendants' conduct (carrying the boxed drugs, opening secured entry, showing and keeping multiple luggage/bags in their residence accessible only to them) established custody, control and knowledge and satisfied elements of trafficking under s.2 and s.39B ADB; CCW allegations were hearsay or unrelated and did not create reasonable doubt; s.34 common intention and s.37(d) presumption applied; therefore defendants were rightly convicted and sentenced accordingly.
13 May 2025

1. ) Mohamad Nor Sadruddin bin Mustafa 2. ) Mohammad Mustaqim bin Mustafa 1. ) Mohamad Shaqir Hazim bin Kamaruzaman 2. ) Mohd Hanif bin Hasbi

Citation

DA-A73KJ-1048-12/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DA-A73KJ-1048-12/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court refused the application to amend the defence because the amendment was sought after an inordinate delay of nearly a year, the delay was unexplained and constituted a mala fide tactical manoeuvre that would prejudice the plaintiff; Exhibit Y-1 was held to be hearsay and prejudicial and not admissible as reliable evidence in the absence of the coordinator's full report.
21 Mar 2025

1. ) MENACHY A/P MUTHU THEVAR 2. ) XXXX 3. ) KANAMA A/P ARUMUGAM 1. ) MOHD JAILANI BIN GAFARI 2. ) TEE BOON SENG

Citation

BA-12B-33-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-33-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court erred in rejecting the investigating officer's material evidence; taken together with police reports, vehicle damage and the absence of effective rebuttal by Defendant 1, the evidence establishes that a collision occurred and Defendant 1 is 100% liable; imperfections in investigation and absence of forensic paint-transfer reports do not nullify proven facts in a fatal accident case, and therefore the appeal is allowed and liability is imposed on Defendant 1 while the quantum assessed below (RM339,000) is affirmed.
15 Jan 2025

K SENG SENG CORPORATION BERHAD TAN LIAN CHOON

Citation

BA-12B-53-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-53-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed; the Sessions Court was plainly wrong on liability because the trial Judge improperly shifted the burden to the plaintiff, failed to give proper judicial weight to the LGMS forensic evidence which established a prima facie cause of action, and erred in inferring a dominant collateral purpose from discontinuance and other circumstantial factors; accordingly the finding of abuse of process was set aside and costs awarded to the appellant.
5 Dec 2024

ROSNIYATI BINTI MASKAM 1. ) KUGAPRIYA GANASAN (SEBAGAl WAKIL DIRI BAGl SI MATl, MELVINDER SINGH A1L MANJIT SINGH YANG TELAH MENlNGGAL DUNIA PADA 4.9.2023) 2. ) YASMIN SYAKIRAH BINTI ZAKARIA 3. ) TETUAN MELVIN YASMIN & ASSOCIATES

Citation

BA-22NCvC-337-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-337-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found Defendants failed to prove Plaintiff consented to use the full sale proceeds to settle her son's loans and fees; the LAA did not specify amounts and evidence did not discharge Defendants' burden. The deceased's unsworn statement was admissible but of limited weight; DW-2's evidence was not excluded as hearsay. Under the Partnership Act the Second Defendant and the firm are jointly liable for misapplication of client funds. Judgment entered for Plaintiff for RM913,200.00 plus interest and costs awarded.
13 Jun 2024

V A L V A N

Citation

WA-24F-30-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24F-30-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed with costs because it was procedurally flawed, lacked substantive and contemporaneous evidence (police report hearsay and delayed), relied on uncorroborated and contextless video recordings susceptible to manipulation, prior psychiatric assessment cleared the Plaintiff, police/DPP took no further action, no special circumstances existed to justify a stay, and the application bore indicia of bad faith aimed at denying access.
2 Apr 2024

MOHAMAD AIRIL BIN MUSTAFA LEALI 1. ) MUHAMMAD TARMIZI BIN AB WAHAB 2. ) Jabatan Penjara Malaysia (JPM) 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia

Citation

NA-11ANCvC-4-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-11ANCvC-4-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proof; his account was uncorroborated, inconsistent with vehicle damage and injury patterns, and he failed to call the IO whose investigation supported the defendant; IO evidence was admissible and the defendant's version was inherently more probable; accordingly the appeal is dismissed with costs.