XXXX v XXXX

ba-22ncvc-431-07-2016 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 29 September 2025 • BA-22NCVC-431-07/2016 • 6 min read

Catchwords

This is an appeal by the Plaintiff against the Court’s decision who declined to grant the Plaintiff leave to commence committal proceedings against the Defendant under Order 52 of the Rules of Court 2012. Committal requires strict procedural compliance. Here, the operative Court of Appeal order alleged to have been breached was not served, having instead served a copy of the amended High Court order; service was irregular; the penal notice was attached only to an obsolete High Court order; and the alleged acts do not correspond to any surviving operative terms of the order. These are not minor defects but strike at the foundation of committal jurisdiction. The Plaintiff has therefore failed to cross the mandatory threshold for leave.

Judges (1)

Anita binti Harun Delivered

Counsel (2)

Balbeer Singh & Associates Firm Balbeer Singh Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

Xxxx Defendant Xxxx Plaintiff

Case Significance

XXXX v XXXX is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated September 29, 2025 (citation: ba-22ncvc-431-07-2016). The case was decided by Anita binti Harun.

What was the outcome of XXXX v XXXX?

XXXX v XXXX is a High Court decision dated September 29, 2025. The case was heard by Anita binti Harun. See the full judgment for details.

Statutes Cited

Rules of Court 2012

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-22ncvc-431-07-2016)