Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Costs recovery

Legal area

Court

10 Nov 2025

MELBOURNE SUNRISE SDN BHD HOW NAM HUI PENCELAH CHONG VOON KEONG

Citation

BA-22NCvC-103-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-103-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

A counterclaim that seeks recovery of legal fees as damages without any contractual, statutory or indemnity basis does not disclose a reasonable cause of action and is legally unsustainable because costs are recoverable only under the costs regime; accordingly the counterclaim is struck out under Order 18 r.19(1)(a) ROC.
10 Jan 2025

1. ) ROSEMAN BIN HASSAN 2. ) ZAKARIA BIN YACOB 3. ) ROSNAN BIN SHAFIE 4. ) MOHAMED ZAMANI BIN ISMAIL KDE RECREATION BERHAD

Citation

BC-A52NCvC-8-04/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BC-A52NCvC-8-04/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court awarded modest general damages of RM5,000 to each plaintiff for loss of enjoyment but dismissed claims for inconvenience/discomfort, reputational damage, alternative golf expenses and medical expenses due to lack of cogent documentary evidence and absence of causal link to the termination; limited special damages allowed only where receipts directly supported the expense (Plaintiff 1: gym RM5,700, temporary KDE membership RM900, voucher RM100); legal costs claimed as special damages were rejected because a costs order of RM50,000 had already been made and legal costs cannot be recovered…
23 Mar 2023

TETUAN ZURINA, HAFIZAH & CO. (Menyaman sebagai sebuah firma) 1. ) MOHD SOLEHHUDIN BIN ABDUL 2. ) NUR MOHD AMRUL SHAFWAN BIN BHARUM

Citation

CA-A72NCvC-182-07/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CA-A72NCvC-182-07/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the appointment and the expenditures were established by affidavit and exhibits (including a cancellation letter sent by the defendants), the defendants' denials were shadowy and unmeritorious and did not disclose triable issues; accordingly the Order 14 application succeeded in part and judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the properly proved advances and solicitor's fees totaling RM21,814 plus costs RM500; exemplary damages were not proven and rejected.
29 Nov 2021

TAN YEAN KUEN LEE GEE LAM

Citation

JB-22NCVC-10-02/2021 (ENCLOSURE 7) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ENCLOSURE 7
Case number

JB-22NCVC-10-02/2021 (ENCLOSURE 7) (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application to strike out was dismissed: conversion of an Originating Summons to a Writ under Order 28 r.8 is discretionary and does not preclude adducing additional facts in subsequent pleadings; non‑payment of costs in the earlier Originating Summons does not, by itself, constitute a ground under O.18 r.19(1)(c) or (d) to strike out the Writ; the Defendant failed to show the claim was plainly and obviously unsustainable or that there was prejudice or abuse warranting strike‑out.

Malaysia Case Law

MELBOURNE SUNRISE SDN BHD HOW NAM HUI PENCELAH CHONG VOON KEONG

1. ) ROSEMAN BIN HASSAN 2. ) ZAKARIA BIN YACOB 3. ) ROSNAN BIN SHAFIE 4. ) MOHAMED ZAMANI BIN ISMAIL KDE RECREATION BERHAD

TETUAN ZURINA, HAFIZAH & CO. (Menyaman sebagai sebuah firma) 1. ) MOHD SOLEHHUDIN BIN ABDUL 2. ) NUR MOHD AMRUL SHAFWAN BIN BHARUM

TAN YEAN KUEN LEE GEE LAM