Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Access to justice

Legal area

Court

13 Jun 2024

DATO' RICHARD DILAAN MORAIS 1. ) RAAM KUMAR A/L M. SUPPIAH 2. ) CHURCH OF OUR LADY OF LOURDES, IPOH PENCELAH 1. ) TETUAN K.B. TAN KUMAR & PARTNERS (didakwa sebagai sebuah firma) 2. ) CHARLES SURESH MORAIS

Citation

AA-22NCvC-34-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-22NCvC-34-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applying its discretion under Order 23 r 1 and inherent jurisdiction (Order 92 r 4), the court found the plaintiff is an undischarged bankrupt, his conduct indicates self‑serving litigation and defendants have a prima facie sustainable defence; balancing access to justice and protection of defendants, the court ordered security for costs of RM30,000 within 30 days and costs of the application of RM1,000 to be paid by the plaintiff.
2 Feb 2024

1. ) TAN SEE MENG 2. ) TAN SEE NONG 3. ) LIM PECK HONG 4. ) SAWIT RAYA SDN. BHD. 5. ) KIAN HUAT OILMILLS SDN. BHD. ABLE OILS & FATS SDN BHD

Citation

W-02(IM)(NCC)-1240-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-02(IM)(NCC)-1240-07/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Security for costs was ordered only against the Fourth and Fifth Appellants because credible evidence showed they were impecunious (Fourth under judicial management, Fifth dormant with land that may form part of disputed subject matter) and therefore likely unable to pay costs; the First to Third Appellants did not meet Order 23 thresholds and impecuniosity alone was insufficient to justify security against them; prior notice is not mandatory under s44 CJA and r17 RCA and RM50,000 in total was a fair and reasonable security for the three interlocutory appeals.
26 Sept 2023

MALAYSIA LAND PROPERTIES SDN BHD XXXX

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-13-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-13-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was allowed because the respondent failed to prove two essential elements of the tort of abuse of process — that the plaintiff's dominant purpose in instituting the defamation suit was collateral and that the respondent suffered proven damage as a consequence; the Sessions Court's reliance on an unrelated later suit (Suit 680) was factually and legally misplaced; filing a defamation suit in response to allegedly defamatory words is a legitimate exercise of the right to seek redress and does not, on these facts, constitute abuse of process.
29 Oct 2021

DIRIJOHAN SDN BHD MULTAZAM DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & DUA LAGI

Citation

WA-22C-104-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-104-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The applications for security for costs were dismissed because the court, exercising its discretion, found that a winding up status did not automatically require security; given the advanced stage of trial, credible prospect of success, late timing of the applications and the fact the winding up was initiated by the third defendant in a related dispute (risking stifling a genuine claim), it was not just to order security.
8 Jan 2021

MARIA CHIN ABDULLAH 1.KETUA PENGARAH IMIGRESEN 2.MENTERI DALAM NEGERI

Citation

01(f)-5-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

f
Case number

01(f)-5-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Sections 59 and 59A of the Immigration Act 1959/63 are unconstitutional to the extent they exclude the right to be heard and exclude judicial review; no valid written law authorised the respondents to blacklist or impose the travel ban on a person holding a valid passport; the right to travel is protected as part of personal liberty under Article 5(1); accordingly the travel ban was unlawful and declarations and prohibition granted; ouster clauses cannot oust judicial power under Article 4(1).
13 Jul 2020

TAN BON KIAT 1. LAU KOK GUAN @ LOW KOK GUAN 2. GAVIN LOW PENG KUANG 3. GOH PENG FEN [Kesemua beramal sebagai rakan kongsi di Tetuan Lau Kok Guan, Liana & Kuan]

Citation

JA-22-NCVC-92-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22-NCVC-92-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the plaintiff's bankruptcy did not by itself bar an order for security for costs; having considered all circumstances the defendants provided reasonable grounds to believe the plaintiff would be unable to pay costs and demonstrated a prima facie defence, therefore under Order 23 r1(1)(b) the court exercised its discretion to order security for costs of MYR30,000 within 30 days (reducing the defendants' claim for MYR70,000).
17 Apr 2020

SS PRECAST SDN. BHD. (Co. No. 971510-K) 1. SERBA DINAMIK GROUP BHD. & 9 OTHERS

Citation

BA-22C-6-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22C-6-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court validated the hearing by Skype because counsel for the parties consented and, alternatively, the court had discretion under the Rules of Court and constitutional access-to-justice principles to order VC; unaffirmed affidavits were permitted due to PCIDR provided counsel gave undertakings to affirm and refile after PCIDR lapses; a conditional ad interim stay of execution was justified to preserve the status quo pending merits; the interim stay order did not finally dispose of rights and was not immediately appealable.

Malaysia Case Law

DATO' RICHARD DILAAN MORAIS 1. ) RAAM KUMAR A/L M. SUPPIAH 2. ) CHURCH OF OUR LADY OF LOURDES, IPOH PENCELAH 1. ) TETUAN K.B. TAN KUMAR & PARTNERS (didakwa sebagai sebuah firma) 2. ) CHARLES SURESH MORAIS

1. ) TAN SEE MENG 2. ) TAN SEE NONG 3. ) LIM PECK HONG 4. ) SAWIT RAYA SDN. BHD. 5. ) KIAN HUAT OILMILLS SDN. BHD. ABLE OILS & FATS SDN BHD

MALAYSIA LAND PROPERTIES SDN BHD XXXX

DIRIJOHAN SDN BHD MULTAZAM DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & DUA LAGI

MARIA CHIN ABDULLAH 1.KETUA PENGARAH IMIGRESEN 2.MENTERI DALAM NEGERI

TAN BON KIAT 1. LAU KOK GUAN @ LOW KOK GUAN 2. GAVIN LOW PENG KUANG 3. GOH PENG FEN [Kesemua beramal sebagai rakan kongsi di Tetuan Lau Kok Guan, Liana & Kuan]

SS PRECAST SDN. BHD. (Co. No. 971510-K) 1. SERBA DINAMIK GROUP BHD. & 9 OTHERS