Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Striking out (o.18 r.19)

Legal area

Court

16 Apr 2026

1. ) Ahmad Rubil Bin Ahmad 2. ) Mazawati Osman 3. ) Low Koe Sei 4. ) Koh Mei Leng 5. ) Abdul Malek Bin Ahmad Zaini 6. ) Haironi Binti Raffaiee 7. ) Chong Sun Chan 8. ) Tong Yap Lan 9. ) Syarifah Aliza Binti Syed Azauddin 10. ) Juraimi Azaha

Citation

WA-22NCvC-655-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-655-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the plaintiffs' substantive claim was finally dismissed and affirmed on appeal, the underlying basis for the interlocutory injunction failed and the plaintiffs' undertaking to pay damages is operative even without a separate retrospective finding that the injunction was wrongly granted; accordingly the defendants are entitled to proceed with assessment and the plaintiffs' applications to strike out and to stay are dismissed.
14 Dec 2023

IQBAL FEIRUZ KHAN BIN MOHAMED RAFIK ADRIAN WONG SHIANG HOE

Citation

BB-B53F-8-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BB-B53F-8-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The pleadings, on their face, disclosed no reasonable cause of action because the impugned Facebook postings fell within ordinary inter-party dispute and constituted fair comment without malice; the statements were not prima facie defamatory and the action amounted to an abuse of process, therefore striking out under O.18 r.19 was appropriate and the writ and statement of claim were dismissed with costs RM4,000.00.
8 Nov 2022

Chan Sok May Siaw Ching Cheng

Citation

BA-22NCvC-264-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-264-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court struck out the plaintiff's suit under O.18 r.19 because the consent judgment was perfected and partly implemented, the plaintiff failed to establish exceptional circumstances to set aside the consent order, and the alleged misrepresentation and withdrawal of RM111,025.00 are matters for the Sessions Court or for counterclaim/set-off, rendering the High Court action obviously unsustainable and an abuse of process.
15 Apr 2022

P2 ASSET MANAGEMENT SDN BHD 1. ) ENTOMO MALAYSIA SDN BHD (dahulunya KPISOFT MALAYSIA SDN BHD) 2. ) REVOLUSI ASIA SDN BHD 3. ) MYSJ SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-516-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-516-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the Defendants failed to show the amendments should be disallowed: the amendments were bona fide, arose from the same or substantially the same facts, caused no uncompensable prejudice, and cured defects in the original pleading; consequently the Amended Statement of Claim disclosed a cause of action against the 3rd Defendant and the strike out applications were dismissed; any defect in the writ endorsement was curable under Order 18 r.15.
12 Apr 2022

DEEPAK JAIKISHAN A/L JAIKISHAN REWACHAND TAN HAN WEE

Citation

WA-22NCvC-608-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCvC-608-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The claim was struck out because on the face of the pleadings the plaintiff lacked locus standi (no shareholder status in Astacanggih), had not pleaded particulars of the alleged conspiracy against the defendant, and had failed to plead any exception to the registered owner's indefeasible title under s.340; the claim was therefore obviously unsustainable and properly struck out under O.18 r.19.
15 Feb 2022

1. ) Krishnasamy A/l Kuppusamy 2. ) Nagesvari A/p Kayamboo 1. ) PENGARAH HOSPITAL SULTANAH AMINAH JOHOR BAHRU 2. ) Jabatan Kesihatan Negeri (JKN) 3. ) KETUA PENGARAH KESIHATAN KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA 4. ) Kerajaan Malaysia PIHAK TERK

Citation

JA-21NCvC-25-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-21NCvC-25-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the suits were time‑barred under the Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 (36‑month limitation) and on the face of the pleadings disclosed no reasonable cause of action; striking out under O.18 r.19 was therefore justified and the strike‑out order was affirmed with costs awarded.
2 Nov 2021

LIFE PLAZA SDN BHD PASUKHAS CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22C-22-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22C-22-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found on the affidavit evidence that the building was completed in 2008 and placed in the plaintiff's possession and left vacant for years; the plaintiff failed to explain why inspection was not carried out before the May 2020 settlement and the mid‑December 2020 inspection raised suspicion about bona fides. Although the alleged latent defect might be triable, the plaintiff's conduct justified permitting the suit to proceed only on condition that the plaintiff secure the outstanding settlement balance, therefore the court ordered the plaintiff to deposit RM500,000 into an interest b…
5 Feb 2021

United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd 1. Heveaplast (M) Sdn. Bhd. 2. Wong Ban Tin 3. Heng Sook Theng

Citation

BA-22NCC-12-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCC-12-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held summary judgment for the plaintiff because defendants, who were non‑parties to the earlier See Brothers litigation, were not estopped by res judicata or issue estoppel; the guarantees rendered the defendants liable as principal debtors on demand (demand was issued in 2019); the redemption sum did not discharge the loan (it was held in stakeholder account and later refunded); the bank's certificate of indebtedness was conclusive absent manifest error or fraud; no triable defence existed; accordingly plaintiff's summary judgment application allowed and defendants' striking out ap…