MUHAMMAD ARSHAD BIN DHAKYUDHEEN v 1. ) TERAJU BAKTI TRADING 2. ) ZIAHUL HAQ BIN JAMIRULLAH KHAN 3. ) SYED OSMAN BIN ABDUL RAHIM 4. ) NORAZEANA BINTI MOHD AZMI 5. ) ALIS MART 6. ) ALI AKBAR BIN SULAIMAN 7. ) RADZIAH BINTI ABDUL RAZAK
Catchwords
1. Enclosure 14 is the Plaintiff’s application for summary judgment against the First, Second and Third Defendants pursuant to Order 14 of the Rules of Court 2012. 2. The principles governing an application for summary judgment are well settled. The burden lies on the Plaintiff to establish a clear and unanswerable case. Once this is done, the evidential burden shifts to the Defendants to demonstrate that there exist bona fide triable issues or that there ought for some other reason to be a trial. 3. It is trite that the Court does not conduct a mini trial in an Order 14 application. The question is whether the Defendants have raised issues which merit ventilation at a full trial. The Federal Court in Bank Negara Malaysia v Mohd Ismail & Ors [1992] 1 MLJ 400; [1992]1 MLRA 190; [1992] 1 CLJ (Rep) 14 reiterated that summary judgment is only appropriate in plain and straightforward cases, and should not be used for matters that require extensive evidence analysis.
Judges (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (pa-22ncc-73-09-2025)