Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Standard of appellate review (plainly wrong)

Legal area

Court

6 Nov 2025

IEM SA FLOWBIRD MALAYSIA SDN BHD

Citation

W-02(NCvC)(W)-740-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

W-02(NCvC)(W)-740-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On the evidence and applying the established elements for breach of confidence and fiduciary duties, the trial judge was not plainly wrong to find that confidential information was disclosed by Flowbird's employees/directors to IEM and used to secure projects, constituting breach of confidence, breach of fiduciary duty and conspiracy to injure; however the original damages award for the Rotorua contract (USD253,321.30) exceeded recoverable loss of profit and must be reduced to USD51,610.00 (sales minus cost). The remainder of the High Court judgment, including injunctions and findings of liab…
7 Apr 2025

DATO' SERI YONG TU SANG 1. ) TOP 2 GLOBAL SDN BHD 2. ) WEE WOAN JIUAN

Citation

T-02(NCvC)(W)-1293-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

T-02(NCvC)(W)-1293-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court's finding that the oral arrangement was a gratuitous gift and that YTS had no legal entitlement to claim RM862,500; however the court found the trial judge plainly wrong in rejecting documented payments of RM30,000 and failing to explain rejection of the remaining overpayment, allowed Top 2 Global’s counterclaim and entered judgment for RM145,432.00 with interest and costs.
29 Nov 2024

MEUS CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (SEBELUM INI DIKENALI SEBAGAI "SETIA SYNERGY MARKETING SDN. BHD.) LIM KIM HIN

Citation

CB-12BNCvC-2-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-12BNCvC-2-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court's factual findings that the guarantee document did not name the Perayu and that there was no privity or collateral contract were supported by the documentary and oral evidence; there was no demonstrable error of law or insufficiency of judicial appreciation to render the findings plainly wrong, therefore the appeal is dismissed and the Sessions Court decision is affirmed.
28 Feb 2024

Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow Kam Lee Ching @ Kang Sak Wah

Citation

WA-12BNCC-34-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCC-34-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court’s factual finding that the RM600,000 was a personal loan was supported by direct evidence (bank transfers, penalty for premature withdrawal, witness demeanour and familial relationship), the Appellant failed to adduce documentary proof of entitlement to company profits and failed to call his father whose evidence was central, and therefore the trial judge was not plainly wrong; appeal dismissed.
7 Sept 2022

CHEAH HOCK CHUAN NG FOOK TEN (Berniaga atas nama dan gaya Pretige G

Citation

JA-12B-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12B-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge's findings that the vehicle transfers were contra payments supported by a duly executed Letter of Indemnity, the appellant's admissions (including WhatsApp/audio) and the absence of adequate contrary evidence meant the appellant failed to prove a sale or that the indemnity was void; appellate intervention was unwarranted as the trial court was not plainly wrong and the parol evidence rule barred contradicting the written indemnity.
6 Oct 2021

BALAKRISHNAN A/L SAMYKANNU SIME DARBY PLANTATION BERHAD

Citation

WA-12BNCVC-34-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCVC-34-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal is dismissed because the Sessions Court correctly found no collateral/oral contract or fraudulent misrepresentation (there was no documentary evidence or coherent formula for RM400,000 and the WhatsApp related to insurance), and the Appellant breached the Mutual Separation (Clause 9) by demanding additional sums and commencing litigation, thereby forfeiting entitlement to RM115,584; the income tax clearance condition (Clause 4) justified non-payment until clearance; the Sessions Court was not plainly wrong.
10 Dec 2020

1. ) HO WEI YAP 2. ) CHONG CHOY YEW 1. ) HO KIM LING 2. ) CHAI YIKE FONG

Citation

-AA-12BNCvC-5-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

-AA-12BNCvC-5-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: plaintiffs produced contemporaneous deposit slips, corroborated by the transaction solicitor and timeline consistent with SPA, establishing payment into the defendant‑managed account; the defendants' alternative explanation was unpleaded and inadmissible; s73A permitted documentary evidence where maker was beyond the seas; no adverse inference under s114(g) was warranted; appellate interference was unwarranted because the trial judge's factual findings were not plainly wrong. Consequently the appeal was dismissed and the Sessions Court judgment rest…

Malaysia Case Law

IEM SA FLOWBIRD MALAYSIA SDN BHD

DATO' SERI YONG TU SANG 1. ) TOP 2 GLOBAL SDN BHD 2. ) WEE WOAN JIUAN

MEUS CAPITAL SDN. BHD. (SEBELUM INI DIKENALI SEBAGAI "SETIA SYNERGY MARKETING SDN. BHD.) LIM KIM HIN

Dato' Sri Andrew Kam Tai Yeow Kam Lee Ching @ Kang Sak Wah

CHEAH HOCK CHUAN NG FOOK TEN (Berniaga atas nama dan gaya Pretige G

BALAKRISHNAN A/L SAMYKANNU SIME DARBY PLANTATION BERHAD

1. ) HO WEI YAP 2. ) CHONG CHOY YEW 1. ) HO KIM LING 2. ) CHAI YIKE FONG