1. ) RESTORAN NAIZ ALI SDN. BHD. 2. ) RIZAL ALI BIN NAIZALI BERNIAGA SEBAGAI PAKEEZA RESTAURANT & CATERING v 1. ) A CERENIO RESOURCES SDN. BHD. 2. ) MUHAMMAD ZAHID 3. ) ASIF ALI 4. ) SADIQ BIN AHMAD SAID 5. ) Mohamed Amin Bin Mohamed Shabir

wa-22ip-41-05-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 4 March 2025 • WA-22IP-41-05/2024 • 31 min read

15 cases cited (3 SG, 12 foreign)

Catchwords

Application to intervene and be added as a defendant-Order 15 rule 6(2)(b) of the Rules of Court 2012-The principle of overriding importance is that all necessary and proper parties, but no others, should be before the court at the same time to enable the effectual and complete determination and adjudication to be made by the court of all questions and issues between the parties which arise for decision-To this end, no action will be defeated by reason of mere mis-joinder or non-joinder of any party which is capable of being remedied and is no defence-Additionally, the court has extensive discretionary powers – to add, substitute or strike out parties who are not proper or necessary, and for these purposes the court may even act of its own motion-Generally, in common law and chancery matters, a plaintiff who considers that he has a cause of action against a defendant is entitled to pursue his remedy against that defendant alone and he cannot be forced to pursue his remedy against other persons who he has no wish to sue-Nevertheless, a person who is not a party may be added as a defendant over the objections of the plaintiff on his own intervention or upon the application of the defendant or in some cases by the court of its own motion-But, a defendant against whom no relief is sought by the plaintiff will generally not be added against the wishes of the latter. (See Hood-Bars v Frampton & Co [1924] WN 287.) A third party notice is in such a case usually the proper procedure to adopt though such a defendant can be added in a proper case-The tests the Court will use to decide an application by a person to be added as a defendant when no relief is sought by the plaintiff against that person-A person against whom no relief is sought by a plaintiff will generally not be allowed to intervene to be added as a defendant in a suit against the wishes of the plaintiff. This is because a plaintiff is entitled to pursue his remedy against a defendant that he chooses and he cannot be forced to pursue his remedy against other persons who he has no wish to sue-A person will generally not be allowed to intervene in a suit to be added as a defendant if his interest will only be affected commercially, but not legally affected by the judgment in the said suit. However, in a proper case intervention will be allowed-The dichotomy between "legal" and "commercial" interests is not helpful. A better way of expressing the test is: will his rights against or liabilities to any party to the action in respect of the subject matter of the action be directly affected by any order which may be made in the action?-

Judges (1)

Leong Wai Hong Delivered

Counsel (11)

Azmi & Associates Firm Saiful, Roger & Co. Firm Suren Subra Law Chambers Firm Azra Hazirah Counsel Intervener Hazreel Hagim Counsel Plaintiff Izzat Asyraf bin Zamri Counsel Plaintiff Nursyafiqah Counsel Intervener Raja Muhamad Zulqarnain B. Raja Abd Rahman Counsel Plaintiff Siti Noorhazirah Counsel Intervener Siti Nur Athira binti Rohizad Counsel Defendant Surendran Subramaniam Counsel Intervener

Parties (7)

A CERENIO RESOURCES Sdn Bhd Defendant RESTORAN NAIZ ALI Sdn Bhd Plaintiff RIZAL ALI BIN NAIZALI BERNIAGA SEBAGAI PAKEEZA RESTAURANT & CATERING Plaintiff Asif Ali Defendant Mohamed Amin bin Mohamed Shabir Defendant Muhammad Zahid Defendant Sadiq bin Ahmad Said Defendant

Case Significance

1. ) RESTORAN NAIZ ALI SDN. BHD. 2. ) RIZAL ALI BIN NAIZALI BERNIAGA SEBAGAI ... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated March 4, 2025 (citation: wa-22ip-41-05-2024). The case was decided by Leong Wai Hong.

What was the outcome of 1. ) RESTORAN NAIZ ALI SDN. BHD. 2. ) RIZAL ALI BIN NAIZALI BERNIAGA SEBAGAI ...?

1. ) RESTORAN NAIZ ALI SDN. BHD. 2. ) RIZAL ALI BIN NAIZALI BERNIAGA SEBAGAI ... is a High Court decision dated March 4, 2025. The case was heard by Leong Wai Hong. See the full judgment for details.

Statutes Cited

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (15)

SG (1)

[2015] SGCA 60

SLR (2)

[2001] 4 SLR 25 [2016] 1 SLR 915

UK (7)

[1892] 1 Ch 487 [1902] 1 Ch 911 [1942] AC 332 [1944] Ch 41 [1951] 1 Ch 33 [1956] 1 QB 357 [1968] 2 QB 587

MY (5)

[1969] 2 MLJ 52 [1991] 1 MLJ 27 [1992] 2 MLJ 63 [1993] 2 MLJ 143 [1997] 3 CLJ 946

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ip-41-05-2024)