Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Post-judgment interest

Legal area

Court

18 Nov 2025

LEE CHAI SENG PENCELAH MAGNUM CONSORTIUM SDN BHD

Citation

25-16-2011 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

25-16-2011 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Deputy Registrar's decision was affirmed in part: the Intervener was not entitled to recover the claimed loan interest of RM6,190,634.83; loss of profit claim was limited to the period during which the Registrar's Caveat subsisted (10.03.2011 to 29.09.2011) and the 5% per annum post-judgment interest awarded by the DR is retained under Order 42 r 12 Rules of Court; pre-judgment interest beyond the High Court Order was not awarded under s11 Civil Law Act because the High Court Order did not provide for it.
27 Apr 2025

MOHD SUHAIMI BIN OTHMAN 1. ) MOHD AMIRUL HAFIZ BIN ISMAIL 2. ) NORIZATUL IRNIAFIRA BINTI MOHD SAYUTI

Citation

DA-12B-23-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-12B-23-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Session Court correctly found defendant 100% liable because defendant entered the emergency lane without signaling and stopped suddenly creating a hazardous situation; High Court will not disturb the Session Court's damages awards (RM65,000 general; RM10,400 loss of earnings; RM30,000 loss of earning capacity) as not manifestly excessive and will uphold 5% p.a. interest per Chief Justice practice direction.
11 Nov 2024

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD BATU KEMAS INDUSTRI SDN BHD

Citation

A-01(W)-247-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

A-01(W)-247-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that pre-judgment interest was discretionary and not warranted given the Federal Court's remit; statutory post-judgment interest at 5% per annum applies from the date of the judgment (17.3.2022) until satisfaction; documents merely marked "ID" and not admitted as exhibits cannot support assessment of damages so awards based solely on them must be reduced to nominal sums; the High Court did not exceed the Federal Court's remit in awarding replacement/repair costs and its discretionary reduction of the quantum to RM35,000,000 was not disturbed.
11 Nov 2024

Kerajaan Malaysia BATU KEMAS INDUSTRI SDN BHD

Citation

A-01(W)-242-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

A-01(W)-242-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's approach on replacement/repair costs (RM35,000,000) as within judicial discretion and within the Federal Court remit; denied pre-judgment interest but held statutory post-judgment interest at 5% p.a. runs from date of judgment (17.3.2022) until full settlement; reduced awards relying on inadmissible ID documents (paras (c)-(e)) to nominal RM1,000 each; deleted para (b) as subsumed into para (f); parties to bear own costs.
11 Nov 2024

BATU KEMAS INDUSTRI SDN BHD 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

Citation

A-01(W)-243-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

A-01(W)-243-04/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Pre-judgment interest is discretionary and not awarded because Federal Court remit was specific; post-judgment interest at statutory rate 5% per annum is payable from the date of the High Court assessment judgment (17.3.2022) until full payment; the High Court did not err in awarding RM35,000,000 for replacement/repair where the valuation evidence was unrebutted and the judge made justified adjustments; documents marked "ID" are not admissible to prove quantum so heads supported only by ID documents reduced to nominal damages of RM1,000 each; deletion of para (b) as subsumed into para (f) and…
18 Oct 2024

VANTAGE TRADING PARTNERS SDN BHD CERMAT RIA SDN BHD

Citation

BA-12ANCvC-7-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12ANCvC-7-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed in part: Sessions Court's award of pre-judgment interest was correct in principle but should run only until date of judgment; pre-judgment interest at 1.5% per month to be calculated to date of judgment (amount fixed in judgment calculation as RM8,640.37 as at 4-7-2023) and post-judgment interest set at 5% per annum from date of judgment until full payment; no bona fide triable issues on revised rates, removal of goods or election of remedies to defeat summary judgment.
1 Jul 2024

Mohamad Foyaz bin Shamsul Alam (menyaman bagi pihak sendiri dan bagi estet Kamaliah Binti Mat Sari, simati) 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) Dr Abu Yazid b. Abu Othman 3. ) Dr Rathimalar a/p Kerisnan 4. ) Dr Munirah bt Mohd Arif Kor 5. ) Dr Rohi

Citation

WA-21NCvC-61-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-21NCvC-61-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Omission to name the dependant (daughter) and the nature of her claim in the writ was fatal under s7(7) Civil Law Act 1956, limiting plaintiff to his personal claim under s7; plaintiff failed to prove deceased had income so loss of contribution claim is dismissed; award of loss of support quantified at RM700/month for 16 years (RM134,400) plus statutory bereavement RM10,000 and proved special damages RM25,000.50; claims for value of familial care, pre-trial care, loss of contribution and pre-action legal fees were dismissed; interest and costs awarded as set out.
4 Mar 2024

TELEKOM MALAYSIA BERHAD 1. ) AIMIRUS CONSTRUCTION 2. ) MOHAMAD ADRUS BIN KAMARUL AZMAN 3. ) NABILAH AZWA BINTI MOHAMAD ADRUS

Citation

BA-22NCvC-494-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-494-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Liability having been admitted, the court assessed quantum: allowed material costs and reasonable management costs; rejected unsupported labour claims; reduced contractor payments by 25% for failure to mitigate and unreasonable excess; applied GST to final awarded special damages; awarded RM50,000 general damages; found contributory negligence by plaintiff and reduced award by 50%; refused aggravated and exemplary damages; awarded post-judgment interest at 5% p.a. and costs RM10,000, resulting in judgment for RM407,444.95 plus interest and costs.
10 Jul 2023

Rosita Simanungkalit 1. ) Thivagar a/l K Saven @ Kaesaven 2. ) Icon Trans Sdn Bhd 3. ) Ravinderan a/l Munusamy 4. ) KJJ Maju Enterprise

Citation

PB-A53KJ-21-01/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

PB-A53KJ-21-01/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

A recorded consent judgment is presumed to include general and special damages including interest; therefore plaintiff cannot later claim pre- or post-judgment interest absent agreement of all parties who were bound by the consent judgment, and Order 42 Rule 12 does not permit unilateral variation of that consent; accordingly the defendants' amended draft judgment is allowed and the plaintiff's interest claim is dismissed.
27 Jun 2023

TECT HUAT DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD 1. ) GOH CHENG HUAT 2. ) GOH CHENG HUAY 3. ) GOH CHING CHAI 4. ) GOH CHING ENG 5. ) GOH CHING SEONG

Citation

BA-22NCvC-476-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-476-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held both valuation reports admissible and used the 2015 baseline value (RM440,000) with a 5% annual appreciation to 2022, determined market values of RM109.5 psf for commercial lots and RM47.63 psf for residential lots, calculated the combined land value at RM2,610,309.06, found enhancement attributable to the plaintiff of RM610,309.06, deducted the defendants' 31% entitlement under the JV Agreement, resulting in the plaintiff's recoverable sum of RM421,113.25; ordered payment with post-judgment interest and return of the 25 titles to the defendant upon payment; no order as to cost…