Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Third-party indemnity

Legal area

Court

17 Dec 2025

NTROUPE RESOURCES TEBOOK HOUSE SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-297-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-297-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Agreement imposed an express, unconditional obligation to pay RM4,000,000 according to a fixed schedule; Plaintiff performed and Defendant did not. There is no contractual term linking repayment to the Project or making repayment contingent on profit or project commencement. Defendant's correspondence amounted to acknowledgements of debt and its factual explanations (postponement, funds utilisation, potential third‑party claims) do not disclose a bona fide triable defence. Summary judgment was therefore properly entered.
26 Feb 2025

1. ) JABATAN KERJA RAYA NEGERI SELANGOR 2. ) JABATAN KERJA RAYA DAERAH PETALING JAYA 1. ) SULAIMAN BIN MOHAMED 2. ) JURUMART SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-12B-103-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-103-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants were liable for negligence for failing to maintain the public road (including omissions); photographic evidence was admissible on proper identification; statutory immunity under the Government Proceedings Act 1956 does not bar negligence claims in road maintenance; delegation to a contractor does not absolve the State; the third party contractor was contractually obliged to perform inspections and pothole repairs and must fully indemnify the defendants; the trial court's apportionment of contributory negligence (plaintiff 40%) and assessment of damages were not disturbed.
25 Nov 2024

SYARIKAT METAL INDUSTRIES SDN BHD ANWAR EZZAD BIN ZAINAL PIHAK KETIGA Hasan @ Sharfuddin Bin Hamat

Citation

BA-22NCvC-216-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-216-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found an implied retainer existed and the defendant owed and breached professional duties by failing to file and approve pre-trial documents, failing to attend the 30.7.2015 case management and failing to communicate material developments to the client; unpaid fees or alleged lack of documents did not excuse the breach; the breach caused loss of plaintiff's substantive remedy and plaintiff proved loss such that damages and costs should be awarded.
8 Mar 2024

DATUK BANDAR, DEWAN BANDARAYA KUALA LUMPUR 1. ) MOHD HAKEEM BIN HANIFF 2. ) SISTEM PENYURAIAN TRAFIK KL BARAT HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 3. ) NURUL SHAFINAZ BINTI ABDUL RASHID

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-60-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-60-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Imprecise factual particulars in a Statement of Claim are not automatically fatal; where the variance does not constitute a radical departure and the defendant is not misled or prejudiced, admissions and evidence at trial can cure defects and the substantive issues must be decided on the merits. DBKL owed a non‑delegable statutory duty to maintain the road and, on the evidence and admissions, was liable to the plaintiffs; DBKL's indemnity claim against Sprint succeeded on evidence that the accident occurred on Sprint's maintained stretch and Sprint's claim against Time Dotcom succeeded where…
1 Mar 2024

1. ) MOHD HAKEEM BIN HANIFF 2. ) NURUL SHAFINAZ BINTI ABDUL RASHID 1. ) DATUK BANDAR, DEWAN BANDARAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2. ) SISTEM PENYURAIAN TRAFIK KL BARAT HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 3. ) Time Dotcom Berhad

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-56-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-56-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held that the inaccuracies in the Statement of Claim (road name variation and description as 'large hole' rather than 'manhole') were not fatal because the evidence, admissions and documents produced at trial showed the accident, its general location and cause such that respondents were not taken by surprise; applying the variation versus radical departure test from Ang Koon Kau the Sessions Court erred in dismissing the suit and should have decided on the merits. Accordingly the plaintiffs' appeal against DBKL is allowed, DBKL's cross-appeal on quantum is dismissed, DBKL's ind…
1 Mar 2024

SISTEM PENYURAIAN TRAFIK KL BARAT HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. Time Dotcom Berhad

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Minor imprecision in particulars of a Statement of Claim does not automatically defeat a claim; where evidence and admissions establish the material facts and the defendant is not surprised or prejudiced, the court must decide on the merits. Applying that test, the Sessions Court was wrong to dismiss the plaintiffs; DBKL remained liable for failure to maintain the road and Sprint and Time Dotcom are liable on indemnity where evidence and admissions supported those claims.
1 Mar 2024

SISTEM PENYURAIAN TRAFIK KL BARAT HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. Time Dotcom Berhad

Citation

WA-12BNCvC-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCvC-63-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Errors in particulars of the Statement of Claim were not fatal because the evidence, documentary admissions and witnesses established the accident location and cause and did not take defendants by surprise; therefore the Sessions Court erred in dismissing the claim on that ground. DBKL remained liable for failure to ensure safe road conditions; DBKL's indemnity claim against Sprint and Sprint's indemnity claim against Time Dotcom succeeded where admissions and failure to rebut evidence established responsibility; appellate court will not disturb quantum within acceptable range.
18 Dec 2023

1. ) SIAW YEN JAK 2. ) SIAW LEE YEN 1. ) YOONG WAI KWONG 2. ) ERLIANA BINTI ROSLAN 3. ) YOONG WAI SAM 4. ) YOONG WAI KEN

Citation

NA-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Under s38(3) Electricity Supply Act 1990 and binding authority, liability for loss due to meter tampering is imposed on the registered consumer/account holder at the time the offence is discovered; Premier Harvest was the registered consumer at the relevant time and failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the registered owners (third parties) or occupiers were responsible, therefore the appeals are dismissed and the decisions of the Sessions Court are affirmed.
7 Dec 2023

Suthan a/l Panchadcharam Isha Educare Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-B52NCC-99-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BA-B52NCC-99-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court granted summary judgment because the auditor's confirmation of balance, unqualified financial statements filed by the Defendant, the Defendant's pleadings and failure to rebut or reply to demand constituted clear admissions and contemporaneous documentary proof of the debt of RM838,672.54; no bona fide triable issue was shown and the burden to disprove shifted to the Defendant who failed to do so.
7 Dec 2023

Suthan a/l Panchadcharam Isha Educare Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-B52NCC-99-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BA-B52NCC-99-07/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Summary judgment was entered because contemporaneous documentary evidence (auditor's confirmation, unqualified financial statements filed at SSM, statutory declarations by director, and letter of demand) together with judicial admissions in the defence established the debt of RM838,672.54 and showed no bona fide triable defence; the defendant's third‑party indemnity plea did not negate liability and the discovery application was nugatory.