Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Remoteness

Legal area

Court

29 Aug 2025

JM Letrik Sdn. Bhd. Gas Malaysia Distribution Sdn Bhd

Citation

JA-12BNCvC-18-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12BNCvC-18-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

High Court upheld trial judge's findings that defendant breached its duty of care by deviating from the approved HDD profile, failing to ensure a minimum 3m safe distance and to expose the plaintiff's gas pipeline, and by carrying out works without valid work permits and supervision; those breaches caused the pipeline damage and the plaintiff proved losses of RM744,271.24 on the balance of probabilities; appellate court will not disturb trial judge's factual findings absent plain error, therefore appeal dismissed.
12 Aug 2025

1. ) Good Quantum Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) Datuk Chang Kok Chuang 3. ) Right Development Activities Sdn. Bhd. Alliance Investment Bank Berhad

Citation

WA-28PW-277-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-277-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Claims and evidence relating to losses arising from the rejection of the PCB Restructuring Scheme were excluded because the Court of Appeal made no finding that the rejection was caused by the bank; the primary appellate declaration that the novation, repayment agreement and guarantee were void restored the status quo and precluded GQSB from asserting ownership-based claims for wrongful or negligent sale; only RM1,059,671.84 (partial payment under the repayment agreement) is recoverable to GQSB with specified interest; RDA's RM50 million claim and Datuk Chang's claims for reputational/emotion…
19 Mar 2025

1. ) PENGARAH/JURUTERA DAERAH JABATAN KERJA RAYA NEGERI SEMBILAN 2. ) Jabatan Kerja Raya Seremban 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 1. ) IQMAL IZZUDDEEN BIN MOHD ROSTHY 2. ) YANG DIPERTUA MAJLIS PERBANDARAN SEREMBAN 3. ) MAJLIS PERBANDARAN SEREMBAN 4.

Citation

N-04(W)-496-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

N-04(W)-496-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal of Defendants 3-5 on liability, holding that supervision and maintenance of the roadside tree was the responsibility of the local authority (Defendants 1 and 2) under section 101(b) Local Government Act 1976; Defendants 6 and 7 were not liable because their maintenance concession had expired; the trial court's factual finding that the tree was rotten and top-heavy causing the fall was upheld and applied to attribute liability to the local council rather than JKR or the former concessionaire.
6 Jan 2023

1. ) Good Quantum Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) Datuk Chang Kok Chuang 3. ) Right Development Activities Sdn. Bhd. Alliance Investment Bank Berhad

Citation

WA-28PW-277-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28PW-277-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court held (i) the Court of Appeal did not find AIBB responsible for the Securities Commission's rejection and evidence of losses arising from that rejection is excluded from assessment; (ii) the phrase 'general damages' in the pleadings and Grounds of Judgment in the present case covers both pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses so evidence on both is admissible; and (iii) because the Liability Judgment ordering assessment of damages for breach of the collateral contract and for illegal/wrongful and negligent sale remains operative, the Assessing Party may adduce evidence in support of thos…
18 Feb 2022

TAN LIAN HWA CHENG JIT YANG

Citation

PA-12B-46-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-46-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court accepted unrebuked expert testimony linking the iatrogenic notching fracture to the operation causally connected to the accident and found the Sessions Court erred in failing to award damages for that injury; extensor mechanism weakness was held to be contributed to by the plaintiff and not awarded; appeal allowed in part with RM20,000 awarded for the iatrogenic notching fracture (pain, suffering and bone grafting) and RM5,000 costs to be paid by the respondent.
18 Feb 2022

TAN LIAN HWA CHENG JIT YANG

Citation

PA-12B-46-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-46-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed in part because unchallenged expert evidence established that the iatrogenic notching fracture was caused by the operation and thus causally linked to the original injury; award RM20,000 for the fracture (pain and suffering and bone grafting); extensor mechanism weakness was held to be contributed to by the appellant and no award made for that condition; costs of RM5,000 awarded to appellant.
12 Jul 2020

1. MISI ARMADA SDN BHD 2. IB BUILDERS SDN BHD SPNB ASPIRASI SENDIRIAN BERHAD

Citation

DA-22NCC-3-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCC-3-03/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Preliminary objection dismissed; plaintiff entitled to general damages for loss of profit because the loss naturally arose from defendant's repudiation and was within contemplation of the parties (supplementary DA cl 3.1(c) and s 74 Contracts Act); expert Hashimah's moderation method was the only available evidence and was reasonable though estimative; the court reduced her estimate by 15% and awarded RM65,000,000 for loss of profit; interim certified claim and balance of land cost are not part of this assessment; no costs awarded.
21 Jan 2020

1. TAN KOK KUAN (NO. K/P : 770218-14-5335) 2. MICHAEL & PARTNERS WEALTH MANAGEMENT SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 687152-V) HONG LEONG ASSURANCE BERHAD (NO. SYARIKAT : 94613-X)

Citation

BA-22NCC-104-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCC-104-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The written agency agreements expressly permitted either party to terminate on 15 days' written notice; there was no ambiguity to justify implying a duty of good faith or a legitimate expectation preventing termination; the defendant complied with the contractual termination provisions; the plaintiffs' pleading disclosed no reasonable cause of action and was frivolous, scandalous and vexatious and therefore the claim was struck out and dismissed with costs.
30 Aug 2019

1. ANUAR BIN ROZHAN 2. CHE KAMARUDIN BIN MOHD 3. CHEW SIANG PENG 4. CHONG KWET HIN 5. CHOO PIN YAN 6. CHOY SOO NGOH 7. EMMALINE ASHLEY-WAY CHUA 8. FOO KWEE SIM 9. GOH KEAT CHOO 10. JASMIN VICTORIA A/P EMMANUEL 11. LEE CHENG LEAP 12. KO KIM

Citation

WA-22NCVC-9-01/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCVC-9-01/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to prove on balance of probabilities that the Defendant made the pleaded representations; even if representations were made, no sufficient proximity or duty of care arose and public policy (contractual remedies against developer/escrow and caveat emptor) negated imposing a duty; plaintiffs also failed to prove causation and actual losses (no evidence escrow funds were misreleased); claim dismissed and costs awarded to defendant.