Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Issue estoppel/res judicata

Legal area

Court

8 May 2026

Lim Aik @ Lim Yeok 1. ) Goh Siew Koon @ Eng Sing Kuan 2. ) Tey Liong Seng 3. ) Tey Sui Kiat 4. ) Sin Hai Estate Berhad 5. ) Sing Lian Sdn Bhd 6. ) TEY BOON GIOW & SONS SDN. BHD

Citation

M-02(IM)-1622-08/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

M-02(IM)-1622-08/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the subsequent evidence on Sing Lian's liquidation was irrelevant to these appeals; the Winding Up Court's earlier decision refusing ratification/payment to PWCAS is final as there was no appeal and, given Mr Lim's breaches of s236(2)(i) CA 1965 and rr171 and 173 WUR, issue estoppel bars his claim for fees in respect of the period during which he appointed PWCAS and payments were made (7.9.2012 to 14.12.2015). The High Court decisions are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Winding Up Court before another judge/Judicial Commissioner to re-determine a fair and reasonable…
31 Mar 2026

XXXX XXXX

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-21-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-21-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court held the typo in the Consent Order was a clerical mistake correctable under Order 20 rule 11 and the Court's inherent jurisdiction; the Appellant had standing notwithstanding expired business registration (partners had relief under s8(1) affirmed by higher courts); the Consent Order was not frustrated or discharged by the judge's death; accordingly the Consent Order dated 27.05.2018 is amended to correct the Sessions Court judgment date from 05.09.2017 to 04.09.2017 and no costs were awarded.
3 Mar 2025

1. ) RADIANT SPLENDOUR SDN BHD 2. ) RAJESH A/L JAIKISHAN DR MOHAMMAD HANIS BIN OSMAN

Citation

WA-22M-1515-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22M-1515-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court struck out the Writ and Statement of Claim because the SOC failed to plead a reasonable cause of action against the defendant (defective particulars and lack of causative link), the defendant was the wrong party for claims arising from settlement agreements to which he was not a party and which predated his tenure, the plaintiffs' claims amounted to an abuse of process and duplicative litigation barred by issue estoppel, and reliance on informal ministerial notes did not convert into binding directions under s16 Bank Rakyat Act; accordingly the claim was plainly unsustainable and ve…
20 Oct 2022

1. ) Lee Li Wun 2. ) Lee Mee Wun 3. ) Muhammad Badrul Amin Lee Bin Abdullah 4. ) Lee Li Wun (Wakil Peribadi Mak Chee Yook (No. Kp: 330108-71-5158), Si Mati 1. ) Lee Yong Wun 2. ) Maneemallah a/p V. Ganesan 3. ) PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH KUANTA

Citation

BA-21NCC-2-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-21NCC-2-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held it possessed inherent jurisdiction under Order 92 r.4 ROC 2012 to vary a sealed custody order where there is a material change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the protected person; D1's medical evidence demonstrated such a material change and risk to the Father's health, therefore Enclosure 172 succeeded and the Order dated 7.9.2020 was varied; no order as to costs.
7 Jun 2022

Chua Siao Chong [Kedua-duanya Berniaga Sebagai Rakan Perkongsian Atas Nama Dan Gaya Megathech M&e Engineering] (No. Pendaftaran: 002172298-h) BRECON SYNERGY SDN BHD

Citation

BA-24C-88-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24C-88-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs were entitled to enforce adjudication decisions under s30 CIPAA because prior proceedings established defendants as Axisjaya's principals (issue estoppel), plaintiffs met statutory conditions and served s30 demands, defendants failed to discharge the evidential burden to prove no money was due or payable and suppressed material documents (permitting an adverse inference); therefore defendants must pay adjudicated amounts with interest; adjudication costs are not recoverable under s30.
11 Oct 2021

DA-12BNCVC-1-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

DA-12BNCVC-1-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-12BNCVC-1-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appellate court upheld that delivery orders, invoices and account statements established appellant as the customer and that appellant had admitted and partly executed payment instructions which left an outstanding balance of RM311,260.10; the prior winding-up petition did not produce a final decision on the debt and therefore estoppel did not bar the claim, so the judgment for the respondent was affirmed.
18 Aug 2021

HOTEL SENTRAL PUDU SDN BHD AUTOCUBE (BEIJING) NEW ENERGY TECHNOLOGY CO LTD

Citation

WA-24NCC(ARB)-23-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ARB
Case number

WA-24NCC(ARB)-23-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court set aside the CIETAC award because Hotel Sentral was not duly and properly notified of the arbitration (s.37(1)(a)(iii)) and enforcement would offend the public policy of finality given the award had been previously set aside and that decision affirmed (res judicata / s.37(1)(b)(ii)); the defendant's unsworn explanations were insufficient to rebut those findings.
27 Jul 2021

STAR MEDIA GROUP BERHAD 1. ) JAKS RESOURCES BERHAD 2. ) JAKS ISLAND CIRCLE SDN. BHD.

Citation

W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1435-10/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1435-10/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Interlocutory findings in Originating Summonses dismissing injunctions to restrain calls on BGs were tentative and not final; res judicata/issue estoppel did not bar JAKS/JIC from litigating the extended completion date or other disputed factual issues at trial; Order 14A disposal was inappropriate because material facts and expert/industry matters were in dispute; High Court order striking out JRB's defence and counterclaim was set aside and matters remitted for trial.
27 Jul 2021

Jaks Resources Berhad Star Media Group Berhad

Citation

W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1122-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-02(IM)(NCvC)-1122-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the interlocutory High Court findings in the originating summonses were tentative and not final; res judicata/issue estoppel did not bar JRB/JIC from litigating the completion date and related construction issues in the substantive suits. Order 14A disposal was inappropriate because material facts were genuinely in dispute; therefore the High Court decision striking out defences/counterclaims was set aside and the matters were remitted for full trial.
11 May 2021

MOHD IZZUDDIN SYUKRI BIN ISHAK PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO BERHAD (NO. SYARIKAT: 12557-W)

Citation

WA-22NCC-168-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-168-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The claim is a recovery action under s96(1) RTA which falls within High Court jurisdiction; s65(1)(a) SCA does not strip the High Court of jurisdiction or confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Sessions Court for such recovery proceedings; having elected to commence proceedings in Kuala Lumpur the plaintiff cannot now seek transfer on forum convenience; therefore the transfer application (Enclosure 92) is dismissed.