Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Leave to apply for committal

Legal area

Court

23 Jul 2025

LOW HUEI YING ANDREW GREGORY SEWELL

Citation

WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24F-216-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Order 52 is the governing framework for committal leave; the defendant's Order 52 statement sufficiently particularised breaches, service on the plaintiff's solicitors was justifiable and not prejudicial, and the plaintiff's unilateral enrollment of the child in school that curtailed the defendant's court-ordered access constituted a deliberate, wilful breach of the consent order amounting to contempt. The application to set aside was dismissed and the committal application was allowed; sanction limited to a formal reprimand and costs given mitigating considerations (motherhood).
27 Apr 2021

PNL Capital Sdn Bhd & 4 Ors Ong Shin Joe Liew Chia Soon & Ors

Citation

WA-22NCC-623-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-623-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applicant had locus standi but failed to demonstrate a prima facie wilful breach of the consent judgment because the phone was seized by the police (a supervening event beyond respondents' control) and paragraph 3 of the consent judgment did not require plaintiffs to return the phone to the applicant; concurrent proceedings to set aside the consent judgment rendered the committal application premature, therefore leave was refused.
1 Jan 1900

1. ) 1.CHAN ENG LEONG (NO. K.P: 740302-07-5475) 2. ) 2. CHONG BEE CHOO (NO. K.P: 740309-07-5312) 1. ) 1.GOH CHOON KIM (NO. K.P: 610901-07-5201) 2. ) 2.ONG AH POH (NO. K.P: 620317-07-5148) 3. ) 3.GLOBAL TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS (INTERNATIONAL)

Citation

22NCVC-8-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

22NCVC-8-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The ex parte leave was set aside because the Applicants failed to show personal service of the Notices to Show Cause as mandated by O.52 r.2B and O.62 r.3/r.9; that procedural breach is fatal. Substantively Applicants also failed to establish contempt: the trilogy of letters were legal positions/elections not acts effecting removal; D3's protective terms were enforceable only by D3 (Applicants lacked locus); and the business premises and freight‑forwarder incidents did not fall within the order's scope interpreted contextually and ejusdem generis. Consequently leave for committal was properly…

Malaysia Case Law

LOW HUEI YING ANDREW GREGORY SEWELL

PNL Capital Sdn Bhd & 4 Ors Ong Shin Joe Liew Chia Soon & Ors

1. ) 1.CHAN ENG LEONG (NO. K.P: 740302-07-5475) 2. ) 2. CHONG BEE CHOO (NO. K.P: 740309-07-5312) 1. ) 1.GOH CHOON KIM (NO. K.P: 610901-07-5201) 2. ) 2.ONG AH POH (NO. K.P: 620317-07-5148) 3. ) 3.GLOBAL TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS (INTERNATIONAL)