Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial appreciation of evidence

Legal area

Court

24 Nov 2025

ABDUL KARIM ABDUL AZIZ 1. ) IDA SHAZREEN BINTI OMAR 2. ) NURUL AQIDAH BINTI OTHMAN 3. ) RAIHAN BINTI ABD KARIM

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-12-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-12-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed as incompetent because the appellant filed the notice of appeal and the appeal record outside the time limits prescribed by the Rules of Court 2012 without any application for extension under r.1A; alternatively, on the merits the court affirmed the Sessions Court's findings that the defendant committed repeated tortious sexual harassment against the plaintiffs on the balance of probabilities and that the award of RM50,000 to each plaintiff was reasonable; criminal acquittal was not admitted as fresh evidence and could not displace the civil findings without following…
24 Apr 2025

WABAG MUHIBBAH JV SDN BHD USAHA SELALU SDN BHD

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-26-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-26-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court finding that the plaintiff had accepted defendant's debit notes only under protest and was not estopped from claiming the outstanding sums; the Payment Summary dated 19.01.2019 was issued, certified and checked by defendant and thereby superseded the earlier debit notes as the basis for outstanding liability of RM400,218.14; defendant could not later revert to relying on the debit notes. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
25 Mar 2025

CHAI SENG KUEY GINA CHAN CHING PENG sebagai ibu yang sah dan penanggungan kepada ELISA TAN XIN ER simati, untuk diri sendirir

Citation

JA-12B-32-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12B-32-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the trial court had properly evaluated and accepted credible and unchallenged evidence that the deceased had two sources of income and provided RM5,000 monthly to the claimant, the statutory multiplier of 16 years applied for a deceased under 30, and there was no demonstration that the trial judge acted on any wrong principle or made an unreasonable assessment of damages to justify appellate intervention.
21 Mar 2025

1. ) MENACHY A/P MUTHU THEVAR 2. ) XXXX 3. ) KANAMA A/P ARUMUGAM 1. ) MOHD JAILANI BIN GAFARI 2. ) TEE BOON SENG

Citation

BA-12B-33-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-33-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court erred in rejecting the investigating officer's material evidence; taken together with police reports, vehicle damage and the absence of effective rebuttal by Defendant 1, the evidence establishes that a collision occurred and Defendant 1 is 100% liable; imperfections in investigation and absence of forensic paint-transfer reports do not nullify proven facts in a fatal accident case, and therefore the appeal is allowed and liability is imposed on Defendant 1 while the quantum assessed below (RM339,000) is affirmed.
2 Dec 2024

G.C.S FURNISHING SDN BHD MAH SING PROPERTIES SDN BHD

Citation

JA-11BNCvC-7-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-11BNCvC-7-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Magistrate erred by failing to give proper judicial appreciation to contemporaneous documents and testimony. On the balance of probabilities the respondent failed to prove a valid force majeure event or entitlement to EOT because the extension letters lacked the requisite independent opinion by the proper certifier and TNB letters did not corroborate nationwide shortages or administrative procedural causes. The delay was attributable to the respondent's own failures; therefore the appellant was entitled to LAD and the Magistrate's decision was set aside.
21 Mar 2024

Nur Azillabinti Nadzri Noormah binti Tukimin

Citation

BL-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Trial judge properly conducted judicial appreciation of evidence, accepted respondent's evidence and documents showing respondent paid purchase monies via her company thereby establishing an oral agreement to repay RM420,000; there was no admissible evidence of a buyer willing to pay RM480,000 so the claimed RM36,000 loss was unproved; appeal dismissed and trial decision affirmed.
7 Mar 2024

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD MUHAMMAD EAZRIE HAFIZIE BIN MD ARIS

Citation

BL-11BNCvC-3-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-11BNCvC-3-05/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the trial judge's findings that the magistrate properly applied judicial appreciation of evidence, accepted respondent's credible evidence that his ID had been misused and that TNB failed to sufficiently verify the application; therefore the appellant’s appeal was dismissed and the magistrate’s allowance of the respondent’s counterclaim and quantified damages were maintained.
5 Feb 2024

PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. ) MARIANA BINTI MUHAMMAD 2. ) MOHAMMAD SELIM BIN MAKBUL AHAMAD 3. ) MUHAMMAD ARHAM MIKHAIL (adalah budak bawah umur yang menuntut melalui Ibu yang sah, Mariana Binti Muhammad)

Citation

WA-12BNCC-20-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCC-20-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed because the Sessions Court misdirected itself on the burden of proof and failed to properly appreciate the evidence: the policies lapsed due to plaintiffs' non-payment of premiums after September 2019 rather than proven forgery or insurer's misapplication; forgery was not proven by the plaintiffs; therefore the Sessions Court judgment was set aside and the insurer ordered to pay the misappropriated sum of RM5,667.69.
23 Nov 2022

Razali Shafei Bin Mat (0122313658) G. ALEXANDAR [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

CB-41S-1-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-41S-1-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the magistrate's finding of dangerous driving under s41(1) RTA 1987 was unsafe because the prosecution evidence (eyewitness accounts, investigator's opinion, photographs and post mortem) did not sufficiently and reliably prove the statutory element that the appellant drove in a manner dangerous to the public; the conviction under s41(1) was therefore quashed and substituted with a conviction under s43(1) RTA 1987, with sentence of a fine RM5,000 (six months imprisonment if unpaid) and endorsement of the appellant's licence under s43(2).
19 May 2022

Hock Kheng Construction Sdn Bhd Juntal Engineering Sdn Bhd

Citation

PA-12BNCvC-72-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12BNCvC-72-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court correctly found the plaintiff proved completion of works by production of completion/certification letters and the defendant failed to adduce evidence from SWM to substantiate its defence that payment was withheld for unsatisfactory work; those factual findings were not plainly wrong and consequently the appeal is dismissed and the Sessions Court judgment affirmed.