Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Overriding objective

Legal area

Court

11 Nov 2025

UIS BUILDING MATERIALS SDN BHD XIAO XIANHUA

Citation

JA-22NCvC-95-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-95-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court admitted the contested affidavits for the limited interlocutory purpose because independent evidence (an interpreter affidavit) established comprehension for the Defendant's affidavits and no independent proof was provided that the Plaintiff's deponent did not understand the affidavits; both parties raised serious triable issues but the balance of convenience and inadequacy of damages favored preserving the status quo under the Plaintiff's management; accordingly Plaintiff's inter partes injunction was granted and the Defendant's counter‑injunction dismissed.
10 Nov 2025

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD 1. ) TEBRAU BAY CONSTRUCTIONS SDN. BHD. 2. ) ISKANDAR WATERFRONT CITY BERHAD 3. ) TEBRAU BAY SDN BHD (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI KPRJ NUSANTARA SDN BHD) PIHAK KETIGA PEMBINAAN HAMID ABD RAHMAN SDN BHD PIHAK TERKILAN 1. )

Citation

JA-22NCvC-149-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-149-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application to amend was dismissed because Plaintiff offered no reasonable explanation for nearly two years' delay in bringing the amendment, the application was not bona fide but tactical, the proposed amendment would materially alter the character and quantum of the action (an increase of about RM56.6 million and temporal expansion), and the defendants would suffer serious prejudice not remediable by costs; Hong Leong and Yamaha authorities were applied.
10 Jul 2025

1. ) SHASHI KUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM 2. ) NG KIM HO 3. ) BOBBY ANAK WILLIAM 4. ) CHAN TUCK LOONG 5. ) SRI RAMESH A/L V.KANNAN 1. ) KETUA POLIS NEGARA, MALAYSIA 2. ) Peguam Negara Malaysia

Citation

W-01(IM)-562-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

IM
Case number

W-01(IM)-562-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The High Court erred by failing to apply the low threshold test for ex parte leave; the appellants satisfied the prima facie standard and the JRA was not frivolous or vexatious; reliance on Sundra Rajoo was misplaced because that case dealt with merits after leave had been granted; misjoinder of the IGP is not fatal under Order 15 r 6(1) and the overriding objective requires leave to be granted and the matter remitted for substantive hearing.
28 Nov 2024

PRETIP A/L PERUMAL HENG FOOK BOON

Citation

WA-A73KJ-1016-06/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

WA-A73KJ-1016-06/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The application to amend was dismissed because the proposed amendment sought to change a material fact central to the plaintiff's claim (the identity of the liable party), thereby altering the essence of the case and introducing a new issue late in the proceedings; the defendant had misused Order 20 instead of appropriate misjoinder or substitution procedures, offered no exceptional justification for delay, and the amendment would prejudice the plaintiff and disrupt an already fixed trial date.
5 Sept 2024

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

Citation

CA-22NCvC-36-07/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CA-22NCvC-36-07/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the plaintiff's notices were filed within one month of the final Federal Court decision and, in any event, O.37 r.1 must be read with the overriding objective and O.34 so non‑compliance is not inevitably fatal; accordingly the plaintiff's application for extension/abridgment of time was allowed (with costs to the defendant) and the defendant's application to set aside the notices was dismissed with no order as to costs.
28 May 2024

1. ) Sundararaju A/l Thandava Moorthi 2. ) Letchemy A/p Thavasi Murugan A/l Krishnan

Citation

AA-12A-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-12A-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court erred in entering judgment in default without adequately enquiring into and considering the medical grounds and related facts; the appellants' mis-citation of the procedural provision was a harmless oversight; in the interests of justice the default judgment must be set aside and costs awarded accordingly.
25 Mar 2024

XXXX 1. ) CAKRA BERTUAH TRADING 2. ) CHEE LAI MING

Citation

WA-A53KJ-401-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-A53KJ-401-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

An oral application to discontinue, made after partial hearing, was sufficient where the plaintiff gave reasonable grounds and the defendants were not prejudiced; formal application and affidavits were not required given the overriding objective and Order 2 treating non-compliance as irregularity; court exercised discretion to allow discontinuance with liberty to file afresh and awarded costs to protect defendants (RM5000).
13 Dec 2023

TAN SOW MOOI 1. ) RAINBOW PARADISE BEACH RESORT HOTEL 2. ) CHAMPSURF SDN BHD

Citation

PA-12BNCvC-15-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12BNCvC-15-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court allowed the application because the Rules of Court permit amendment of the MOA and other documents to facilitate determination of the real issues and to correct procedural defects under the overriding objective; the missing pages existed in the served hard copy so re-filing causes no prejudice; the Additional MOA was necessary to address issues arising from the Sessions Court judgment; respondents were not sufficiently prejudiced to warrant an immediate costs award, and costs for this interlocutory application were ordered to be in the cause (RM7,000).
17 Aug 2023

GUNALAN A/L SAGARAN (berurusaniaga atas nama dan gaya sebagai FUTURE RISE AGENCY ) 1. ) MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM 2. ) MUHAMAD ERMAN BIN OMAR HATTAB 3. ) HASWIRA AIMAN BIN HASSAN MERICAN 4. ) NAR TRADING TRADERS SDN. BHD. 5. ) ABDUL WAHAB

Citation

PA-22NCvC-98-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-98-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the plaintiff's statement of claim against Defendants 1–4 disclosed a reasonable cause of action and was not plainly or obviously unsustainable, scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process; therefore the striking out application under Order 18 r 19(1) must be dismissed and the matter proceeded to trial so the disputed facts and allegations of fraud/cheating can be determined.
28 Mar 2023

1. ) WAN MOHD FAISAL BIN WAN YUSOFF 2. ) NUR AFIFA BINTI ABDUL AZIZ 3. ) DAMAI BERSIH SDN. BHD. NURULJANNAH BINTI MOHD AMIN

Citation

BA-23NCvC-37-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-23NCvC-37-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court exercised its discretion under Order 3 r 5 read with Order 1A, Order 2 and Order 92 r 4 to treat the 8‑day late filing as an irregularity rather than a nullity; the defendant gave a satisfactory explanation, sought consent from plaintiffs, there was no irreparable prejudice or substantial miscarriage of justice to plaintiffs, and therefore the Defence filed on 30 September 2022 was accepted as duly filed and the extension of time was granted; costs were ordered in the cause.