TORT: Negligence
8 cases · July 2023 to April 2026
Case Volume by Year
1 23
4 25
3 26
2023–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Medical negligence — Clinical negligence — Ritual circumcision — Procedure performed by qualified Medical Assistants (1st and 2nd Defendants) — Post-operative development of fibrous layer over glans penis — Submission of no case to answer by Defendants at close of Plaintiff's case — First and second limbs of no case to answer — Standard of care and clinical causation in diagnosis and treatment — Whether independent expert medical evidence is mandatory to define standard of care and prove breach — Application of Bolam test and Bolitho logical qualification — Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur — Whether applicable to complex clinical surgical procedures — Presumption of environmental and systemic negligence refuted by undisputed successful surgical outcomes of two cousins undergoing same procedure simultaneously with same instruments and facilities — Physical clinical credentials and competency of practitioners — Failure of Plaintiff to call any medical expert witness — Whether Plaintiff established a prima facie case of negligence — Dismissal of action in limine EVIDENCE: Burden of proof — Standard of proof — Civil trial — Submission of no case to answer — Defendants electing not to call evidence — Effect of election on burden of proof — Whether truth of Plaintiff’s evidence presumed under the Jaafar Shaari rule — Whether Plaintiff absolved from discharging legal burden of proof on a balance of probabilities — Adverse inference — Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 — Plaintiff's failure to produce an independent medical expert to testify on clinical standard of care and causation — Whether adverse inference arises against Plaintiff — Attempt by Plaintiff to invoke adverse inference against Defendants for non-production of written consent forms — Whether Defendants under a legal obligation to adduce evidence to rebut unpleaded allegations — Fact admitted — Section 58(1) of the Evidence Act 1950 — Signed Statement of Agreed Facts (Enclosure 13) — Binding effect of formal admissions on agreed post-procedural clinic visit dates and referral timeline — Expert opinion — Section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950 — Submissions and opinions of counsel — Whether layperson testimony or legal submissions of counsel can substitute for expert medical evidence on technical clinical matters CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings — Statement of Claim — Parties bound by pleadings — Attempt by Plaintiff to raise unpleaded issues during submissions — Alleged lack of departmental leave and administrative authorisation under Regulation 5 of the General Orders (Public Officers) — Alleged lack of professional indemnity insurance — Alleged lack of informed consent — Whether administrative compliance shares a clinical nexus with clinical negligence [255–257] — Whether unpleaded regulatory issues constitute impermissible afterthoughts — Role of trial court in adversarial system — Strict confinement to issues raised on the record — Issues to be tried — Enclosure 14 — Complete omission of informed consent or lack of written consent from agreed Issues to be Tried — Whether Plaintiff procedurally barred from raising unpleaded issues DAMAGES: Personal injury — Special damages — Claim of RM35,000 for future aesthetic and reconstructive surgery — Admissibility of clinical quotation — Failure to call the clinical author of the quotation — Whether the contents of a document are proved merely by marking it as an exhibit — General damages — Claims for permanent anatomical deformity, scarring, and urinary obstruction — Rebuttal of claims by contemporary medical records from Hospital Sultanah Bahiyah documenting a completely healed wound and normal voiding — Aggravated damages — Belated unpleaded claim for aggravated damages — Whether separate awards for aggravated damages are permissible in personal injury negligence claims 1 Duty of care — Breach of duty — Causation — Fatal accident — Death of university student in dormitory — Alleged electrocution from defective wall lamp — Independent technical findings by statutory regulator (Energy Commission) — Whether breach of statutory duties under Electricity Supply Act 1990 and Electricity Regulations 1994 — Res ipsa loquitur 1 Negligent misstatement — Forex investment scheme — Unregulated platform –Alleged negligent representations inducing Plaintiff's investment — Whether duty of care established — Whether special relationship existed — Whether reliance proved — Whether loss caused by representations — Whether a reasonable man would know that he was being trusted — No duty of care established — No reliance proven –Appeal allowed 1 Banker and customer — Duty of care — Pure economic loss — Whether the Bank owed duty of care to third party who is not its customer — Whether the Bank owed duty of care to the Plaintiff, being a director and shareholder of the company — Whether there is sufficient legal proximity between the Plaintiff and the Bank — Whether it is just, fair and reasonable to impose duty of care on the Bank — No special relationship or sufficient legal proximity exists between the Bank and the Plaintiff — Bank owed no duty of care to the Plaintiff in his personal capacity as a director and shareholder of a corporate customer 1 Medical negligence — Blood donation procedure — Venepuncture — Negligent arterial puncture — Diagnosis of pseudoaneurysm and compartment syndrome — Standard of care — Breach of duty — Transfusion Practice Guidelines (3rd Edition, 2008) — Systemic and corporate failure — Personnel credentialing and privileging — Lack of contemporaneous supervision by medical officer. PROFESSIONS: Medical practitioners — Duty to advise on material risks — Informed consent — Patient autonomy — Rogers v Whitaker test — Foo Fio Na principle — Distinction between generally known complications and rare, severe risks — Materiality of risk to a first-time donor — Judicial assessment of risk significance. EVIDENCE: Expert evidence — Conflict between treating physician and independent expert — Primary medical facts vs. theoretical opinion — Factual witness — Preference for contemporaneous clinical findings of a treating surgeon — Dr KS Sivananthan principle — Admissibility — Adverse inference — Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 — Non-production of mandatory logbooks and post-donation observation forms. DAMAGES: General damages — Pain and suffering — Loss of amenities — Complex vascular limb injury — Pseudoaneurysm of the brachial artery — Compartment syndrome — Assessment of quantum — Multiplier and comparability of awards — Special damages — Strict proof of medical expenses. CAUSATION AND APPORTIONMENT: Causation — Lord Denning’s "but for" test — Cork v Kirby Maclean Ltd — Contributory negligence — Failure to mitigate — Refusal of hospital admission — Whether refusal constitutes novus actus interveniens — Apportionment of liability — 70:30 ratio — Tan Ah Kau principle. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal — Principles of appellate intervention — "Plainly wrong" test — Judicial misappraisal of medical evidence — Evaluation of oral and documentary evidence — Costs — Global award for trial and appeal — Complexity of litigation involving multiple medical specialities. 1 Allegation that sand mining activities was negligently being carried out and caused damage to the Plaintiffs’ lands — Whether the Defendants’ owed duty of care to the Plaintiffs — Whether there is a breach of duty of care — Whether the Defendant failed to comply with river sand mining regulations and permit conditions — No sufficient evidence of non-compliance — No breach of duty of care proven 1 Duty of care — Breach — Causation — Loss — Breach of statutory duty — Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 — National Land Code 1 Negligent misrepresentation — Negligent misstatement — Negligent advice — Whether elements can be proven 1
Duty of care — Breach of duty — Causation — Fatal accident — Death of university student in dormitory — Alleged electrocution from defective wall lamp — Independent technical findings by statutory regulator (Energy Commission) — Whether breach of statutory duties under Electricity Supply Act 1990 and Electricity Regulations 1994 — Res ipsa loquitur 1 case
Negligent misstatement — Forex investment scheme — Unregulated platform –Alleged negligent representations inducing Plaintiff's investment — Whether duty of care established — Whether special relationship existed — Whether reliance proved — Whether loss caused by representations — Whether a reasonable man would know that he was being trusted — No duty of care established — No reliance proven –Appeal allowed 1 case
Medical negligence — Blood donation procedure — Venepuncture — Negligent arterial puncture — Diagnosis of pseudoaneurysm and compartment syndrome — Standard of care — Breach of duty — Transfusion Practice Guidelines (3rd Edition, 2008) — Systemic and corporate failure — Personnel credentialing and privileging — Lack of contemporaneous supervision by medical officer. PROFESSIONS: Medical practitioners — Duty to advise on material risks — Informed consent — Patient autonomy — Rogers v Whitaker test — Foo Fio Na principle — Distinction between generally known complications and rare, severe risks — Materiality of risk to a first-time donor — Judicial assessment of risk significance. EVIDENCE: Expert evidence — Conflict between treating physician and independent expert — Primary medical facts vs. theoretical opinion — Factual witness — Preference for contemporaneous clinical findings of a treating surgeon — Dr KS Sivananthan principle — Admissibility — Adverse inference — Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 — Non-production of mandatory logbooks and post-donation observation forms. DAMAGES: General damages — Pain and suffering — Loss of amenities — Complex vascular limb injury — Pseudoaneurysm of the brachial artery — Compartment syndrome — Assessment of quantum — Multiplier and comparability of awards — Special damages — Strict proof of medical expenses. CAUSATION AND APPORTIONMENT: Causation — Lord Denning’s "but for" test — Cork v Kirby Maclean Ltd — Contributory negligence — Failure to mitigate — Refusal of hospital admission — Whether refusal constitutes novus actus interveniens — Apportionment of liability — 70:30 ratio — Tan Ah Kau principle. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal — Principles of appellate intervention — "Plainly wrong" test — Judicial misappraisal of medical evidence — Evaluation of oral and documentary evidence — Costs — Global award for trial and appeal — Complexity of litigation involving multiple medical specialities. 1 case
Allegation that sand mining activities was negligently being carried out and caused damage to the Plaintiffs’ lands — Whether the Defendants’ owed duty of care to the Plaintiffs — Whether there is a breach of duty of care — Whether the Defendant failed to comply with river sand mining regulations and permit conditions — No sufficient evidence of non-compliance — No breach of duty of care proven 1 case
Negligent misrepresentation — Negligent misstatement — Negligent advice — Whether elements can be proven 1 case
Key Statutes
Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)
cited in 3 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Financial Services Act 2013
cited in 1 case National Land Code (Cap 828)
cited in 1 case Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
cited in 1 case Companies Act 2016
cited in 1 case Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Top Firms
Rabinder Budiman & Associates 1 Chambers of Solehuddin & Ozier 1 Yong & Rakan Rakan 1 Athimulan & Co 1 Office of the State Legal Adviser, Kedah 1 S. Raman & Co 1 Attorney General Chambers 1 Brijnandan Singh Bhar & Co. 1 Omayah Nawal & Partners 1 M Manoharan & Co. 1 Jayadeep Hari & Jamil 1 Rajwinjit, Asyraf & Partners 1 Andy & Co. 1 Izral Partnership 1 Mathews Hun Lachimanan 1
Top Lawyers
Tok Hong Chen 1 Mohd Ozier Farhan Bin Mohd Khanafeh 1 Shantini Koshy a/p Cherian Koshy 1 Athimulan a/l Muruthiah 1 Nurul Liyana Mohamad Nasir 1 Norhayati Ibrahim 1 M Humavathi A/P Manikavelu 1 Nurul Waheda Abd Rahman 1 Abdul Rahman Md Zuki 1 Muhamad Aiman Bin Mohd Nahzeri 1 Brijnandan Singh Bhar A/L Gurcharan Singh 1 M Manoharan 1 M.Hariharan 1 Barvina Ponnusamy 1 Sathisharajah Yuvarajah 1
Cases
ka-23ncvc-1-01-2023
AB (Seorang kanak - kanak yang membawa tindakan ini melalui wakil litigasinya SUHAIMAY BIN ISMAIL) v 1. ) Ilham Fitri Bin Murad 2. ) Nazali Bin Malik 3. ) Dr Asri Bin Abdul Aziz 4. ) Poliklinik Ihsan
25 April 2026
MYHC
ka-23ncvc-1-02-2024
R SIVAKUMAR A/L RAJOO v UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
25 April 2026
MYHC
wa-12bncc-11-06-2025
MOHD SHAH REZZA BIN SAM SELI v 1. ) SYED FAIZAL SHAH BIN SYED GULZAR ALI SHAH 2. ) NURUL SHAMEEM BINTI SHAHEEN CHUGTAI
13 April 2026
MYHC
ba-22ncvc-61-02-2025
ALI SAID HAMDAN AL RAWAHI v 1. ) AHMAD BIN HASSAN 2. ) MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD
16 December 2025
MYHC
ka-12b-4-02-2025
AFIQ BIN AZMAN v 1. ) MARYANI BINTI AHMAD 2. ) KETUA JABATAN HEMATOLOGI & TRANSFUSI HOSPITAL SULTANAH BAHIYAH 3. ) PENGARAH HOSPITAL SULTANAH BAHIYAH
19 November 2025
MYHC
ba-23ncvc-27-06-2023
1. ) NOFAL FIRHAT BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) MAD ISA BIN MOHAMED 3. ) MOHD NASRI BIN MOHAMED v 1. ) KUMPULAN SEMESTA SDN BHD 2. ) MAYFAIR TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD
3 September 2025
MYHC
ka-22ncvc-54-10-2021
ART J ORIGINAL SDN BHD v 1. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN NEGERI KEDAH 2. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Langkawi 3. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK TANAH & GALIAN KEDAH 4. ) Kerajaan Negeri Kedah 5. ) KHAW LE NA (menjalankan amalan guaman dibawah nama dan gaya Tetuan Le Siew & Co) 6. ) RAHIM BIN ISMAIL 7. ) NOR AZAHAR BIN ZAINOL 8. ) Muhammad Izat Marican Bin Nor Azahar
23 August 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncc-374-11-2016
GLOBALMARINER OFFSHORE SERVICES SDN. BHD. v 1. ) TH HEAVY ENGINEERING BERHAD [Digulungkan secara sukarela pada 08.09.2023] 2. ) XXXX 3. ) Nor Badli Munawir Bin Mohamad Alias Lafti
20 July 2023
MYHC