Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Compensatory damages

Legal area

Court

11 Aug 2025

HEIWA SANGYO SDN BHD 1. ) SUBRAMANIAM A/L MUNISAMY 2. ) MOHD BAHAROM BIN SAID 3. ) MUHD LUQMAN NULHAKIM BIN MOHD ZULKAPLI 4. ) INDKOM HOLDINGS SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-506-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-506-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found Plaintiff proved only limited unlawful entry and interference by Defendants 1–3 at the shared premises between 5–12 December 2023; evidence was insufficient to establish broader diversion of customers, payments or ongoing interference or to implicate Defendants 2–4. Accordingly Plaintiff was not entitled to permanent injunctions or full damage claims; Defendant 1 was liable for loss caused by the December incidents and ordered to pay RM50,000 with costs RM10,000 subject to taxation; all other claims dismissed.
28 Oct 2024

SMGB GROUP SDN BHD 1. ) APAT A/L GANESAN 2. ) NITA A/P APAT 3. ) RAWI A/L GAUD 4. ) Zaidah Binti Tarak [Sebagai Wakil Diri Bagi Keempat Tarak A/l Batin Deok (No. K/p: 540630-06-5229) Yang Telah Meninggal Dunia Pada 16.12.2021] 5. ) WEE A/L

Citation

CB-12B-17-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-12B-17-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

High Court affirmed the Sessions Court's factual finding that the plaintiffs (Orang Asli occupants) had locus standi and that SMGB was responsible for trespass and compensable damage; it upheld compensatory awards based on JPPH valuations and the parties' MoU/agreements but held that exemplary and aggravated damages were not supported by the evidence and set those awards aside.
26 Feb 2024

MONARCH LODGE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD TELEKOM MALAYSIA BERHAD

Citation

NA-12BNCvC-17-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-12BNCvC-17-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: defendant owed a duty of care, breached that duty by negligently excavating and causing damage to plaintiff's infrastructure, plaintiff proved loss of RM809,458.65 supported by invoices and contractor payments, and is entitled to that sum with 5% p.a. interest from 25.11.2016 until full settlement and costs on the scale; the appellant's challenges were unmeritorious.
19 Jan 2023

VENTURE SKL SDN. BHD. GEONEX (M) SDN. BHD.

Citation

C-02(NCvC)(W)-438-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

C-02(NCvC)(W)-438-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal found the meeting minutes did not effect a mutual annulment of the 26/02/2016 Agreement; consequently the Agreement subsisted until replaced, the Respondent's 29/09/2016 notice amounted to a repudiatory breach, the Appellant validly rescinded and is entitled to compensatory damages under s.76 Contracts Act 1950; the High Court was wrong to infer suppression of evidence and to apply s.114(g) and erred in allowing the Respondent's counterclaim for storage charges.

Malaysia Case Law

HEIWA SANGYO SDN BHD 1. ) SUBRAMANIAM A/L MUNISAMY 2. ) MOHD BAHAROM BIN SAID 3. ) MUHD LUQMAN NULHAKIM BIN MOHD ZULKAPLI 4. ) INDKOM HOLDINGS SDN BHD

SMGB GROUP SDN BHD 1. ) APAT A/L GANESAN 2. ) NITA A/P APAT 3. ) RAWI A/L GAUD 4. ) Zaidah Binti Tarak [Sebagai Wakil Diri Bagi Keempat Tarak A/l Batin Deok (No. K/p: 540630-06-5229) Yang Telah Meninggal Dunia Pada 16.12.2021] 5. ) WEE A/L

MONARCH LODGE DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD TELEKOM MALAYSIA BERHAD

VENTURE SKL SDN. BHD. GEONEX (M) SDN. BHD.