TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD v Tan Li Hua

pa-12bncvc-23-09-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 12 August 2024 • PA-12BNCvC-23-09/2023 • 20 min read
10 cases cited (0 SG, 10 foreign)

Catchwords

Prinsip undang-undang mendengar rayuan adalah jelas dimana Mahkamah yang mendengar rayuan hanya perlu campur tangan apabila mendapati Mahkamah Rendah telah membuat keputusan yang secara terang salah. Saya merujuk kepada kes ICON CITY DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD v. K-SHIN CORPORATION SDN BHD [2022] 1 MLRA 151 di mana Mahkamah telah memutuskan:- [14] We were mindful of the limited role of the appellate court in relation to findings of facts made by the court of first instance. In the case of Lee Ing Chin v. Gan Yook Chin & Anor [2003] 1 MLRA 95; [2003] 2 MLJ 97; [2003] 2 CLJ 19; [2003] 2 AMR 357 where the Court of Appeal held as follows: "... an appellate court will not, generally be speaking, intervene unless the trial court is shown to be plainly wrong in arriving at its decision. But appellate interference will take place in cases where there has been no or insufficient judicial appreciation of the evidence." 16] In the Federal Court case of Ng Hoo Kui & Anor v. Wendy Tan Lee Peng, Administrator of the Estates of Tan Ewe Kwang, Deceased & Ors [2020] 6 MLRA 193; [2020] 12 MLJ 67; [2020] 10 CLJ 1, Zabariah Mohd Yusof FCJ delivering the judgment of the court, held inter alia as follows:" (1) An appellate court should not interfere with the trial judge's conclusions on primary facts unless satisfied that he was plainly wrong. The 'plainly wrong' test operates on the principle that the trial court has had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses on their evidence as opposed to the appellate court that acts on the printed records.

Judges (1)

Rozana binti Ali Yusoff Delivered

Counsel (4)

Aznil, Naziah, Juli & Praba Firm C. P. Ang & Co Firm Aznil Majid Counsel Appellant K.C Ang Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD Appellant Tan Li Hua Respondent

Cases Cited (10)

MY (10)
[2003] 2 AMR 357 [2003] 2 CLJ 19 [2003] 2 MLJ 97 [2015] 1 CLJ 400 [2015] 1 CLJ 521 [2015] 6 CLJ 751 [2017] 4 CLJ 340 [2018] 3 CLJ 557 [2020] 10 CLJ 1 [2020] 12 MLJ 67

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-12bncvc-23-09-2023)