Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Plainly wrong test

Legal area

Court

21 Jan 2026

KONSORTIUM EXPRESS SDN BHD CHONG KIM LOY

Citation

BA-12BNCvC-73-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BNCvC-73-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court correctly found that the Appellant failed to discharge the burden of proving the existence of a trust because the required certainties (intention, subject matter, objects) were not established and there was no documentary linkage of the cheques to identified suppliers; there were no substantial or compelling reasons to disturb those factual findings, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
3 Dec 2025

AZLINA BINTI AHMAD 1. ) RHB ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD 2. ) RHB ISLAMIC INTERNATIONAL ASSET MANAGEMENT BERHAD

Citation

WA-12BNCC-32-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCC-32-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge's findings were within the range of reasonable conclusions: the appellant's pleaded activities fell within CMSA‑regulated activities and she lacked required registration/licence so illegality barred enforcement; there was no proved binding agreement or contemporaneous commitment to pay introducer fees; causation was not established that her efforts were the effective cause of the mandates; and no evidence supported industry rates or quantum meruit. The trial judge was not plainly wrong.
29 Jul 2025

LIM YOKE PIN [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

CB-42JSKS-3-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-42JSKS-3-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed and conviction and sentence quashed because the trial judge materially erred by failing to give proper judicial appreciation to the evidence: the judge conflated reliance on s18 with a finding that the child witness was 'unusually convincing', failed to identify independent corroboration (witnesses merely repeated SP6's account), did not adequately address inconsistencies and delays in the complainant's account, and improperly treated mere opportunity as dispositive; the findings were therefore unsafe and intervention was justified.
24 Jun 2025

TEH KEAN HOOI 1. ) SIANG HENG PLASTIC WARE SDN BHD 2. ) TEOH BOON THONG

Citation

PA-12B-21-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-21-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong on liability and sustained the 50%/50% apportionment after accepting the physical and testimonial evidence that the motorcyclist moved from right to left and the driver swerved left causing right-side impact. The Court varied quantum upward where the Sessions Court had undervalued injuries or wrongly excluded proven injuries: head injury awarded RM180,000; facial fractures RM60,000; loss of three teeth and one chipped tooth RM10,500; bilateral eye injuries RM130,000; actual loss of earnings RM95,000; loss of future earnings RM168,00…
6 Mar 2025

E-KOMODITI SDN BHD CENTURY SOFTWARE SDN BHD

Citation

BA-12B-28-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-28-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Session Court was not plainly wrong: the judge properly applied Order 48 R.1 and s.4 of the Debtors Act, correctly assessed the debtor's means and evidence of transfers to the director and assets as at 31.8.2023, and therefore the Session Court's orders for payment, committal and costs were upheld and the appeal dismissed.
16 Nov 2022

1. ) NUR ALIA MOHAMAD RADZI (SEORANG BUDAK DAN PENDAKWAAN INI DIBUAT OLEH BAPA ANGKATNYA DAN WAKIL LITIGASI, MOHAMAD RADZHI BIN HASSAN 2. ) XXXX 3. ) Mohamad Radzhi Bin Hasan 4. ) MOHAMMAD SAIFUL RIZAL BIN ISMAIL Fazilah Binti Abdul Aziz

Citation

PA-12B-51-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-51-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

TP1 and TP2's purported appeals, conflated with the plaintiff's notice of appeal, were defective because third party proceedings constitute an independent action requiring separate appeals; on the merits the Sessions Court's finding that the defendant was not negligent was not 'plainly wrong' in view of credibility assessments, contemporaneous police report and damage patterns, and the damages assessment was reasonable and not disturbed.
18 Aug 2022

Muhammad Azmi bin Norani 1. ) Rugayah binti Seman 2. ) Mohd Fitry bin Hassan

Citation

BA-12B-8-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-8-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Sessions Court: the Sessions Court's factual finding that the appellant did not suffer erectile dysfunction was not plainly wrong or pervaded by error of law; the Viagra claim failed for lack of proof, was unpleaded and procedurally barred, and even on alternate consideration the claimed lifetime quantum was improperly calculated and manifestly excessive.
31 Oct 2021

1. RAVINDRAN A/L PARTHIPAN 2. KONAR LAPAN GLOBAL TRADING 1. MUHAMAD AZRIZAL BIN ZAINURDIN 2. SELATI BINTI MAIN 3. SAFRISAL BIN OMAR 4. MOHAMAD IZWAN BIN MUHAMAD 5. MOHD HUSNUL FAHRUZI SIREGAR BIN SAIFOL

Citation

JB-12BNCVC-22-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-12BNCVC-22-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Sessions Court's assessment of damages was not excessive or plainly wrong and that the appellate court should not disturb the trial judge's findings; the appeal was dismissed with costs, affirming the quantum and costs awarded below.
30 Nov 2020

Abdul Halim bin A. Tambi Yong Kim Moon Assembly Services Sdn Bhd Md Yusoff bin Ahmad

Citation

BA-12B-35-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-35-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the trial judge's findings on liability were supported by evidence and not plainly wrong and therefore should not be disturbed; appellate interference on quantum was warranted only for items where the trial judge erred in principle or misapprehended the facts (cost of domestic help and loss of earnings), leading to quantified increases; all other quantum items and the dismissal of the claim for a Vellfire, future nursing home care and implant removal were upheld.
25 Sept 2020

LEE KAH WAI (seorang yang ketidakeupayaan disebabkan kecederaan otak yang mendakwa melalui wakil litigasi dan ibunya yang sah iaitu Lim Mei Choo) LIM MEI CHOO ABD SAMAD BIN MURUAN APES HOLIDAYS SDN BHD

Citation

BA-12B-9-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-9-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Sessions Court's factual findings on liability were supported by direct and silent evidence (witness testimony, police sketch, photographs, vehicle damage, investigating officer) and not plainly wrong, thus affirming 100% liability; it found legal error in the trial judge's deduction of one-third for living expenses from future earnings and in failing to apply a one-third discount for contingencies to the multiplier for future supervisory care, and revised the quantum accordingly (increasing post-trial loss of earnings to RM630,120 and reducing post-trial supervisory c…