CIVIL PROCEDURE: Amendment of pleadings
5 cases · August 2024 to February 2026
Case Volume by Year
1 24
2 25
2 26
2024–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Application to amend Defence and Counterclaim under Order 20 rule 5 — Whether amendment changes the character of the suit — Whether amendment introduces a new cause of action or fundamentally different defence — Whether amendment merely particularises and regularises existing defence — Whether issues already raised, argued and considered during summary judgment proceedings — Whether amendment reflects defence already ventilated at summary judgment stage — Whether application is bona fide or a tactical afterthought — Whether amendment necessary to determine real issues in controversy — Whether allowing amendment ensures real issues determined at trial and does not alter nature of action 1 Application to amend Defence and Counterclaim — Leave of court required under Order 20 Rule 5 Rules of Court 2012 — Yamaha Motor three-limb test — Whether amendments change character of suit from one character into suit of another and inconsistent character — Whether application made bona fide — Whether prejudice can be compensated by costs — Hong Leong Finance principles for late amendments — Whether amendments introduce new parties and fundamentally alter factual narrative — Whether amendments made at advanced stage when trial dates fixed and pre-trial preparations underway — Whether cogent and material reasons provided to explain delay of 22 months — Whether application constitutes tactical manoeuvre to circumvent dismissed discovery applications — Whether amendments introduce evidence rather than material facts — Whether efficient administration of justice affected — Whether legitimate expectations of parties to proceed to trial on existing pleadings — Whether courts should assist vigilant and not indolent 1 Application for leave to amend Defence and Counterclaim — Order 20 Rule 5 Rules of Court 2012 — Yamaha Motor three-limb test — Application made at late stage after trial dates fixed — Whether application bona fide — Whether amendments would turn suit from one character into suit of another and inconsistent character — Whether prejudice caused can be compensated by costs — Whether cogent and reasonable explanation for delay provided — Whether application tactical manoeuvre — Whether amendments introduce new causes of action or merely elaborate existing pleaded facts — Whether amendments introduce matters of evidence rather than material facts — Hong Leong Finance principles for late amendments — Whether delay in making amendment application fatal — Court's discretion in balancing interests of justice 1 Joinder of parties — Leave to amend pleadings and join additional parties — Application to join wound-up company as nominal defendant — Application to join law firm and partners as defendants — Whether leave from winding-up court required for joinder of company in liquidation — Whether reliefs sought against nominal defendant substantive or merely consequential — Whether amendment application made bona fide and without undue delay — Whether proposed amendments fundamentally change character of suit 1 Re-amendment of Amended Writ and Statement of Claim — Application to introduce new claims on eve of trial — Whether amendments allowable after 17-month delay following discovery under Anton Piller Order — Whether inordinate delay justified — Whether amendments properly particularized and bona fide — Whether prejudice to defendants could be compensated by costs 1
Application to amend Defence and Counterclaim under Order 20 rule 5 — Whether amendment changes the character of the suit — Whether amendment introduces a new cause of action or fundamentally different defence — Whether amendment merely particularises and regularises existing defence — Whether issues already raised, argued and considered during summary judgment proceedings — Whether amendment reflects defence already ventilated at summary judgment stage — Whether application is bona fide or a tactical afterthought — Whether amendment necessary to determine real issues in controversy — Whether allowing amendment ensures real issues determined at trial and does not alter nature of action 1 case
Application to amend Defence and Counterclaim — Leave of court required under Order 20 Rule 5 Rules of Court 2012 — Yamaha Motor three-limb test — Whether amendments change character of suit from one character into suit of another and inconsistent character — Whether application made bona fide — Whether prejudice can be compensated by costs — Hong Leong Finance principles for late amendments — Whether amendments introduce new parties and fundamentally alter factual narrative — Whether amendments made at advanced stage when trial dates fixed and pre-trial preparations underway — Whether cogent and material reasons provided to explain delay of 22 months — Whether application constitutes tactical manoeuvre to circumvent dismissed discovery applications — Whether amendments introduce evidence rather than material facts — Whether efficient administration of justice affected — Whether legitimate expectations of parties to proceed to trial on existing pleadings — Whether courts should assist vigilant and not indolent 1 case
Application for leave to amend Defence and Counterclaim — Order 20 Rule 5 Rules of Court 2012 — Yamaha Motor three-limb test — Application made at late stage after trial dates fixed — Whether application bona fide — Whether amendments would turn suit from one character into suit of another and inconsistent character — Whether prejudice caused can be compensated by costs — Whether cogent and reasonable explanation for delay provided — Whether application tactical manoeuvre — Whether amendments introduce new causes of action or merely elaborate existing pleaded facts — Whether amendments introduce matters of evidence rather than material facts — Hong Leong Finance principles for late amendments — Whether delay in making amendment application fatal — Court's discretion in balancing interests of justice 1 case
Joinder of parties — Leave to amend pleadings and join additional parties — Application to join wound-up company as nominal defendant — Application to join law firm and partners as defendants — Whether leave from winding-up court required for joinder of company in liquidation — Whether reliefs sought against nominal defendant substantive or merely consequential — Whether amendment application made bona fide and without undue delay — Whether proposed amendments fundamentally change character of suit 1 case
Re-amendment of Amended Writ and Statement of Claim — Application to introduce new claims on eve of trial — Whether amendments allowable after 17-month delay following discovery under Anton Piller Order — Whether inordinate delay justified — Whether amendments properly particularized and bona fide — Whether prejudice to defendants could be compensated by costs 1 case
Key Statutes
Rules of Court 2012
cited in 4 cases Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)
cited in 2 cases Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Firms
Top Lawyers
Victor Pang Chee Siong 2 Shaikh Abdul Saleem bin Shaikh Abdul Karim 1 Jasmin Irisa binti Ahmad Mirza 1 Henry Poh Jun Yang 1 John Aloysius Skelchy 1 So Chien Hao 1 Yap Bing Yew 1 Teo Chung Loong 1 Ong Swee Long 1 Magishashini Assogan 1 Dato' J. Shamesh 1 Poh Jun Yang 1 Teoh Jo Vi 1 Shaikh Abdul Saleem 1 Shirlena A/P Yogeswaran 1
Cases
aa-22ncvc-30-04-2025
NIKATO ENTERPRISE v MC UNITED RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (GROUP) SDN. BHD.
12 February 2026
MYHC
wa-22ncc-140-03-2023
KENANGA INVESTORS BERHAD v 1. ) ZULRAFQ CAPITAL SDN BHD 2. ) TAN SRI ZULHASNAN BIN RAFIQUE PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) DATUK WIRA ISMITZ MATTHEW 2. ) MUHAMMAD TAQIUDDIN HALIM
10 February 2026
MYHC
wa-22ncc-141-03-2023
KENANGA INVESTORS BERHAD v 1. ) ZULRAFQ CAPITAL SDN BHD 2. ) TAN SRI ZULHASNAN BIN RAFIQUE PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) DATUK WIRA ISMITZ MATTHEW 2. ) MUHAMMAD TAQIUDDIN HALIM
27 July 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-609-09-2024
1. ) CHAN KAH LON 2. ) CHAN SEE MAI v 1. ) CHIN JIA YEE 2. ) CHIN THIEN CHOY 3. ) GIRONA VETERINARY SDN. BHD. 4. ) SOLE BIZ SDN. BHD.
9 June 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-93-02-2023
MY JET XPRESS AIRLINES SDN BHD v 1. ) MUHAMMAD ALLIF QAYYUM BIN MOHD DIN 2. ) AZRUL HISHAM BIN DATO ABDUL WAHAB 3. ) ZEN AVIATION SDN BHD 4. ) KHAW CHIN HUAT 5. ) INFINITY FREIGHT SERVICES & SOLUTION PTE LTD 6. ) QUAH LING MING 7. ) PATRICK CHEAH POH JIN PIHAK TERKILAN AIRMARK AVIATION (S) PTE LTD
20 August 2024
MYHC