Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Access to courts

Legal area

Court

5 Mar 2026

SHINE DC TECHNOLOGY SDN. BHD. 1. ) NI, KE 2. ) SHINE TECHNOLOGY PTE LTD

Citation

WA-22NCvC-321-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-321-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Affidavits were not expunged because the jurat defects were procedural irregularities that did not go to the root of the oath; the interim injunction was refused because, although there is a serious issue to be tried, damages are an adequate remedy for commercial losses and the balance of convenience disfavors an injunction that would unduly restrain the Defendants and interfere with winding-up proceedings pending in another High Court.
17 Jun 2019

AHMAD AZHAR BIN OTHMAN (NRIC No.: 681124-10-6277)

Citation

BA-12B-158-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-158-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Section 260 CPC, being a criminal procedure provision, does not by express words or necessary implication bar civil proceedings for battery; to the extent existing law could operate to deprive the constitutional right of access to courts it must be applied with necessary modifications under Article 162(6); Sessions Court had jurisdiction to hear the tort claims but lacked jurisdiction to hear the breach of trust counterclaim which properly lies to the High Court; CCTV evidence (Exhibit P24) was admissible under s 90A EA where certified by the officer responsible for the computer; trial findin…