Tort
44 cases · October 2017 to July 2026
Case Volume by Year
1 17
1 18
1 20
1 21
2 23
6 24
19 25
13 26
2017–2026
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Negligence — Duty of care — Road accident — Tree falling onto federal road — Whether public works department and government liable for failing to maintain or remove dangerous tree within federal road reserve — Whether local authority's statutory powers to trim trees displace federal landowner's common law duty of care — Whether doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applicable 2 Negligence — Res ipsa loquitur — Conditions for application — Tree under exclusive control of defendant authority — Accident of kind not occurring without negligence — Burden of proof shifting to defendant — Failure to provide exculpatory evidence — Inference of negligence drawn 2 Negligence — Concessionaire — Privatisation agreement — Express exclusion of landscaping works from scope of duties — Whether concessionaire liable for tree maintenance — Contractual duties not extending to third party road users 2 Kecuaian — Treler muatan luar biasa — Muatan melintang laluan — Tiada lampu amaran — Permit tidak sah — Kegagalan SOP eskot — Prima facie kecuaian — Tanggungjawab lebih tinggi kenderaan berat — Pembahagian liabiliti. Keterangan — Percanggahan saksi — Kebolehpercayaan — Pembayaran saman sebagai pengakuan sokongan. Undang-undang Trafik — Pelanggaran Kaedah 16 Kaedah Lalu Lintas 1959 — Amalan keselamatan muatan besar. Ganti Rugi — Penilaian kuantum — Garis panduan — Kecederaan otak serius — Kos penjagaan masa hadapan — Tiada asas menaikkan kuantum. Prosedur — Rayuan & rayuan silang — Standard campur tangan — Liabiliti diselaraskan 90:10. 2 Kecuaian — Kemalangan jalan raya — Liabiliti — Rayuan Sivil — Penilaian semula dapatan fakta — Plaintif mendakwa Defendan memandu secara cuai dan menyebabkan kemalangan — Plaintif mengalami kecederaan parah dan tidak memberi keterangan — Pegawai Penyiasat memberi keterangan berdasarkan siasatan serta dokumen pameran — Mahkamah Sesyen menolak tuntutan Plaintif dan mendapati Plaintif cuai 100% — Rayuan oleh Plaintif terhadap liabiliti — Rayuan balas oleh Defendan-defendan terhadap kuantum gantirugi — Isu sama ada Mahkamah Sesyen tersalah dalam menilai bukti dan membuat dapatan berhubung kecuaian serta liabiliti pihak-pihak — Prinsip campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan terhadap dapatan Mahkamah bicara — Tiada kekhilafan jelas (plainly wrong) oleh Mahkamah Sesyen — Mahkamah mendapati Plaintif cuai 100% — Rayuan Plaintif terhadap liabiliti ditolak — Rayuan Defendan-defendan terhadap kuantum juga ditolak — Award gantirugi am dan khas dianggap munasabah dan setimpal — Tiada kesilapan dalam pelaksanaan budibicara oleh Hakim bicara. 2 Conversion — Essential elements — Intentional dealing — Dealing inconsistent with possessory rights — Authorisation — Procurement — Ratification — Adoption — Whether ownership of premises sufficient to establish conversion — Proof of dealing — Circumstantial evidence — Measure of damages — Nominal damages — Value of converted goods — Electricity as subject matter of conversion — Whether issue necessary for determination. 1 Negligence — Road accident — Quantum of damages — Severe traumatic brain injury — Skull fracture — Post-traumatic epilepsy — Whether awards excessive — Appellate interference with assessment of damages — Loss of earning capacity — Distinction between future earnings and earning capacity — Whether multiplicand-multiplier approach appropriate — Nursing care — Whether medical evidence established lifelong need for nursing assistance — Future pain and suffering for future surgery — Whether award justified. 1 Damages — Quantum — Road traffic accident — Right below‑knee amputation — Appeal against Sessions Court award — Loss of prospect of marriage — Whether award available to male plaintiff — Loss of earning capacity — Whether real and substantial risk of future disadvantage — Cost of prosthesis — Bionic microprocessor prosthesis v mechanical prosthesis — Principle of restitutio in integrum — Whether socio‑economic background of plaintiff relevant — Appeal allowed in part. 1 Accident — Liability — Sessions Court — 100% liability on Defendants 1 Fitnah — Libel — Penerbitan melalui Facebook — Perkongsian semula posting pihak ketiga — Sama ada publication dibuktikan — Sama ada posting merujuk kepada Plaintif — Sama ada perkataan membawa makna fitnah — Penilaian makna menurut pembaca biasa yang munasabah — Bacaan keseluruhan dan konteks penerbitan — Aduan pengguna dan kritikan terhadap caj rawatan pergigian — Makna fitnah gagal dibuktikan. Tort — Fitnah — Innuendo — Keperluan pliding — Aturan 78 Kaedah 3(1) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 — Kegagalan memplidkan fakta luar dan makna tersirat — Sama ada Mahkamah boleh membina sendiri makna fitnah — Innuendo gagal dibuktikan. Tort — Fitnah — Pembelaan — Justifikasi — Komen berpatutan — Perlindungan bersyarat — Seksyen 9 Akta Fitnah 1957 — Posting dalam kumpulan Facebook komuniti pergigian — Isu caj rawatan pergigian dan pengalaman pesakit — Perkara berkepentingan awam atau kepentingan komuniti — Ketiadaan niat jahat — Pembelaan fair comment berjaya. Tort — Malicious falsehood — Tuntutan alternatif — Keperluan membuktikan kepalsuan, niat jahat dan kerugian khusus — Tiada bukti special damage — Tuntutan gagal. Remedi — Gantirugi am — Gantirugi teruk — Gantirugi teladan — Injunksi — Posting dipadam pada hari yang sama — Tiada bukti kerugian reputasi signifikan — Tiada asas injunksi — Tuntutan ditolak sepenuhnya dengan kos RM70,000.00. 1 Negligent misrepresentation — Essential elements — Special relationship — Duty of care — Assumption of responsibility — Failure to plead — Whether claim discloses reasonable cause of action — Sim Thong Realty Sdn Bhd v Teh Kim Dar @ Tee Kim; Khutubul Zaman @ Khutubul Jaman bin SNS Bukhari & Anor v TJB Development Sdn Bhd & Anor applied. 1 Negligence — Road accident — Appeal on quantum — Appellate intervention 1 Kecuaian profesional — Peguamcara — Stakeholder — Transaksi jual beli tanah — Pelepasan wang stakeholder — Sama ada peguamcara wajib mematuhi arahan unilateral anak guam — Standard profesional munasabah — Wong Kiong Hung & Anor v Chang Siew Lan & Anor (Appeal) [2009] 4 MLJ 183 — Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 — Toh Theam Hock v Kemajuan Perwira Management Corporation Sdn Bhd [1988] 1 MLJ 116. Keterangan — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Percanggahan antara keterangan lisan dan dokumen kontemporari — Keterangan SP1 dan SD1 — Mahkamah boleh menerima sebahagian keterangan dan menolak bahagian lain — PP v Datuk Haji Harun Haji Idris (No 2) [1976] 1 MLRH 562. Gantirugi — Kausaliti — Ujian but-for — Keterpencilan kerugian — Kehilangan keuntungan projek pecah lot — Kerugian spekulatif — Beban pembuktian — Seksyen 101 dan 102 Akta Keterangan 1950 — Hong Yik Trading Sdn Bhd v Liziz Plantation Sdn Bhd [2017] 8 CLJ 491 — Majlis Perbandaran Selayang v Suresh Subramaniam [2025] 4 MLJ 303 — Shearn Delamore & Co v Sadacharamani Govindasamy [2018] 3 MLRA 307. 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Rented vehicle — Alleged brake failure — Whether proven — Balance of probabilities — Consistent eyewitness evidence — Absence of skid marks — Investigating officer’s findings — Evidence — Res ipsa loquitur — Applicability — Control over mechanical condition vs driving — Evidential burden — Evidence — Adverse inference — s 114(g) Evidence Act 1950 — Disposal of material evidence — Failure to preserve vehicle — Negligence — Duty of care — Car-sharing operator — Non-delegable duty — Passengers as foreseeable class — Defences — Volenti non fit injuria — No knowledge of specific risk — Not established — Liability — Apportionment — Driver’s contributory negligence — Speed at intersection — 90:10 upheld — Damages — Quantum — Loss of actual earnings — Legality principle — Loss of earning capacity — Multiplier-multiplicand — Practice — Appeal — Appellate interference — No misdirection — Cross-appeal — Competency — Order 8 r 55 ROC 2012 1 Negligence — Claim for breach of contract against the First Defendant and negligence against both Defendants, in relation to cracks and delamination of the external plaster walls of the development Sky Loft Premium Suites — Liability of Defendants in construction Sky Loft Premium Suits — Whether Defendants owed duty of care to purchasers of units in Sky Loft Premium Suites —Whether the Plaintiff has locus standi to commence this action under Strata Management Act 2013 [Act 757] —Whether the Plaintiff’s claim is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1953 [Act 254] — Whether the Defendants are liable in contract and/or negligence — Whether the Defendants owe duty of care to the Plaintiff — Whether the Plaintiff has proven breach duty of care and the breach has caused the damage or harm to the Plaintiff — Whether the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff are legally sustainable 1 Kemalangan jalan raya — Beban pembuktian — Akta Keterangan 1950 ss 101–102 — Kegagalan plaintif membuktikan penglibatan defendan — Percanggahan keterangan — Dokumen kontemporari — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan — Prinsip plainly wrong — Insufficient judicial appreciation of evidence — Kuantum — Taksiran gantirugi bersyarat — Tiada liabiliti — Insurans motor — Rayuan balas penanggung insurans — Remedi deklaratori — Isu akademik — Tiada keperluan deklarasi — Rayuan ditolak — Kos dalam kos 1 Negligence — Road traffic accident — Road maintenance contractor — Plastic cone on road shoulder — Whether contractor negligent — Burden of proof — Balance of probabilities — Evidence Act 1950, s 101 Evidence — Evaluation — Conflicting versions — Police reports lodged belatedly — Police reports lodged on same date using similar language — Whether reports orchestrated by third party — Credibility and probative value — Investigating officer’s conclusion based on presumption — Hearsay evidence — Medical records Appeal — Findings of fact — Trial judge’s failure to judicially appreciate evidence — Undue reliance on police reports — Whether findings plainly wrong — Appellate intervention— “Plainly wrong” test 1 malicious prosecution — prosecutorial authority — no unfettered discretion — no basis for immunity from private action — elements of the tort of malicious prosecution — presumption of legality and deference — malice as a separate element — Article 145(3) Federal Constitution 1 Negligence — Duty of care — Contractor carrying out excavation works — Damage to underground cables belonging to utility company — Whether contractor exercised reasonable diligence 1 professional negligence suit commenced by a bank against a property/estate valuer for overvaluing a property resulting a loss to the bank 1
+ 23 more
Negligence — Concessionaire — Privatisation agreement — Express exclusion of landscaping works from scope of duties — Whether concessionaire liable for tree maintenance — Contractual duties not extending to third party road users 2 cases
ta-12b-7-04-2025 1. ) RAZLEEN BINTI AWANG (Menuntut sebagai balu yang sah kepada Mohd Amin Bin Ibrahim (simati), untuk gantirugi kesedihan, kehilangan tanggungan dan kerugian perbelanjaan di bawah Seksyen 7 Akta Undang-Undang Sibil 1956 (Pindaan) 2. ) XXXX v 1. ) ROADCARE (M) SDN BHD 2. ) Jabatan Kerja Raya Malaysia 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 4. ) PENGARAH JABATAN KERJA RAYA NEGERI TERENGGANU
26 January 2026
ta-12b-8-04-2025 1. ) Nur Zafirah binti Bazaredi 2. ) Norliza binti Mat Hassan v 1. ) Pengarah Jabatan Kerja Raya Negeri Terengganu 2. ) Jabatan Kerja Raya Malaysia 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 4. ) Roadcare (M) Sdn. Bhd.
26 January 2026
Kecuaian — Treler muatan luar biasa — Muatan melintang laluan — Tiada lampu amaran — Permit tidak sah — Kegagalan SOP eskot — Prima facie kecuaian — Tanggungjawab lebih tinggi kenderaan berat — Pembahagian liabiliti. Keterangan — Percanggahan saksi — Kebolehpercayaan — Pembayaran saman sebagai pengakuan sokongan. Undang-undang Trafik — Pelanggaran Kaedah 16 Kaedah Lalu Lintas 1959 — Amalan keselamatan muatan besar. Ganti Rugi — Penilaian kuantum — Garis panduan — Kecederaan otak serius — Kos penjagaan masa hadapan — Tiada asas menaikkan kuantum. Prosedur — Rayuan & rayuan silang — Standard campur tangan — Liabiliti diselaraskan 90:10. 2 cases
ba-12b-54-06-2024 1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD v JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind)
9 October 2025
ba-12b-56-06-2024 JOTHILETCHUMI A/P PERIASAMY (Seorang wakil diri litigasi kepada KESAVAN A/L RAJASEKAR seorang yang kurang upaya dan/atau dari segi perubatan seorang yang tidak waras (unsound mind) v 1. ) GUNALAN A/L SANKARAN 2. ) MEGALIFT SDN BHD
9 October 2025
Kecuaian — Kemalangan jalan raya — Liabiliti — Rayuan Sivil — Penilaian semula dapatan fakta — Plaintif mendakwa Defendan memandu secara cuai dan menyebabkan kemalangan — Plaintif mengalami kecederaan parah dan tidak memberi keterangan — Pegawai Penyiasat memberi keterangan berdasarkan siasatan serta dokumen pameran — Mahkamah Sesyen menolak tuntutan Plaintif dan mendapati Plaintif cuai 100% — Rayuan oleh Plaintif terhadap liabiliti — Rayuan balas oleh Defendan-defendan terhadap kuantum gantirugi — Isu sama ada Mahkamah Sesyen tersalah dalam menilai bukti dan membuat dapatan berhubung kecuaian serta liabiliti pihak-pihak — Prinsip campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan terhadap dapatan Mahkamah bicara — Tiada kekhilafan jelas (plainly wrong) oleh Mahkamah Sesyen — Mahkamah mendapati Plaintif cuai 100% — Rayuan Plaintif terhadap liabiliti ditolak — Rayuan Defendan-defendan terhadap kuantum juga ditolak — Award gantirugi am dan khas dianggap munasabah dan setimpal — Tiada kesilapan dalam pelaksanaan budibicara oleh Hakim bicara. 2 cases
ja-12b-46-06-2023 KOOGELESWARAN A/L A SOUNDARAJAN - seorang kurang upaya yang menuntut melalui ibunya KALAIVENI A/P THANGIAH sebagai wakil litigasi beliau v 1. ) NORZARINA BINTI ROSLAN 2. ) REDZUAN BIN PONIRIN
27 August 2024
ja-12b-52-07-2023 1. ) NORZARINA BINTI ROSLAN 2. ) REDZUAN BIN PONIRIN v KOOGELESWARAN A/L A SOUNDARAJAN - seorang kurang upaya yang menuntut melalui ibunya KALAIVENI A/P THANGIAH sebagai wakil litigasi beliau
27 August 2024
Negligence — Road accident — Quantum of damages — Severe traumatic brain injury — Skull fracture — Post-traumatic epilepsy — Whether awards excessive — Appellate interference with assessment of damages — Loss of earning capacity — Distinction between future earnings and earning capacity — Whether multiplicand-multiplier approach appropriate — Nursing care — Whether medical evidence established lifelong need for nursing assistance — Future pain and suffering for future surgery — Whether award justified. 1 case
Damages — Quantum — Road traffic accident — Right below‑knee amputation — Appeal against Sessions Court award — Loss of prospect of marriage — Whether award available to male plaintiff — Loss of earning capacity — Whether real and substantial risk of future disadvantage — Cost of prosthesis — Bionic microprocessor prosthesis v mechanical prosthesis — Principle of restitutio in integrum — Whether socio‑economic background of plaintiff relevant — Appeal allowed in part. 1 case
Accident — Liability — Sessions Court — 100% liability on Defendants 1 case
Negligent misrepresentation — Essential elements — Special relationship — Duty of care — Assumption of responsibility — Failure to plead — Whether claim discloses reasonable cause of action — Sim Thong Realty Sdn Bhd v Teh Kim Dar @ Tee Kim; Khutubul Zaman @ Khutubul Jaman bin SNS Bukhari & Anor v TJB Development Sdn Bhd & Anor applied. 1 case
Negligence — Road accident — Appeal on quantum — Appellate intervention 1 case
Kecuaian profesional — Peguamcara — Stakeholder — Transaksi jual beli tanah — Pelepasan wang stakeholder — Sama ada peguamcara wajib mematuhi arahan unilateral anak guam — Standard profesional munasabah — Wong Kiong Hung & Anor v Chang Siew Lan & Anor (Appeal) [2009] 4 MLJ 183 — Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 — Toh Theam Hock v Kemajuan Perwira Management Corporation Sdn Bhd [1988] 1 MLJ 116. Keterangan — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Percanggahan antara keterangan lisan dan dokumen kontemporari — Keterangan SP1 dan SD1 — Mahkamah boleh menerima sebahagian keterangan dan menolak bahagian lain — PP v Datuk Haji Harun Haji Idris (No 2) [1976] 1 MLRH 562. Gantirugi — Kausaliti — Ujian but-for — Keterpencilan kerugian — Kehilangan keuntungan projek pecah lot — Kerugian spekulatif — Beban pembuktian — Seksyen 101 dan 102 Akta Keterangan 1950 — Hong Yik Trading Sdn Bhd v Liziz Plantation Sdn Bhd [2017] 8 CLJ 491 — Majlis Perbandaran Selayang v Suresh Subramaniam [2025] 4 MLJ 303 — Shearn Delamore & Co v Sadacharamani Govindasamy [2018] 3 MLRA 307. 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Rented vehicle — Alleged brake failure — Whether proven — Balance of probabilities — Consistent eyewitness evidence — Absence of skid marks — Investigating officer’s findings — Evidence — Res ipsa loquitur — Applicability — Control over mechanical condition vs driving — Evidential burden — Evidence — Adverse inference — s 114(g) Evidence Act 1950 — Disposal of material evidence — Failure to preserve vehicle — Negligence — Duty of care — Car-sharing operator — Non-delegable duty — Passengers as foreseeable class — Defences — Volenti non fit injuria — No knowledge of specific risk — Not established — Liability — Apportionment — Driver’s contributory negligence — Speed at intersection — 90:10 upheld — Damages — Quantum — Loss of actual earnings — Legality principle — Loss of earning capacity — Multiplier-multiplicand — Practice — Appeal — Appellate interference — No misdirection — Cross-appeal — Competency — Order 8 r 55 ROC 2012 1 case
Kemalangan jalan raya — Beban pembuktian — Akta Keterangan 1950 ss 101–102 — Kegagalan plaintif membuktikan penglibatan defendan — Percanggahan keterangan — Dokumen kontemporari — Penilaian kredibiliti saksi — Campur tangan Mahkamah Rayuan — Prinsip plainly wrong — Insufficient judicial appreciation of evidence — Kuantum — Taksiran gantirugi bersyarat — Tiada liabiliti — Insurans motor — Rayuan balas penanggung insurans — Remedi deklaratori — Isu akademik — Tiada keperluan deklarasi — Rayuan ditolak — Kos dalam kos 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Road maintenance contractor — Plastic cone on road shoulder — Whether contractor negligent — Burden of proof — Balance of probabilities — Evidence Act 1950, s 101 Evidence — Evaluation — Conflicting versions — Police reports lodged belatedly — Police reports lodged on same date using similar language — Whether reports orchestrated by third party — Credibility and probative value — Investigating officer’s conclusion based on presumption — Hearsay evidence — Medical records Appeal — Findings of fact — Trial judge’s failure to judicially appreciate evidence — Undue reliance on police reports — Whether findings plainly wrong — Appellate intervention— “Plainly wrong” test 1 case
Negligence — Duty of care — Contractor carrying out excavation works — Damage to underground cables belonging to utility company — Whether contractor exercised reasonable diligence 1 case
professional negligence suit commenced by a bank against a property/estate valuer for overvaluing a property resulting a loss to the bank 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Motorcycle colliding with rear left side of car — Whether trial court erred in fixing 100% liability on motorcyclist — Failure of driver to signal before changing lane — Sudden lateral movement — Physical damage pattern corroborating plaintiff’s version — Investigating officer’s independent evidence — Sessions Court’s misdirection — Contributory negligence — Apportionment of liability — Whether 70:30 apportionment justified. 1 case
Misfeasance in public office — Elements of the tort — Abuse of public power by a public officer with targeted malice or reckless indifference to the probability of harm — Failure to prove bad faith, ill-will, or intention to injure — Public officer acting in accordance with official procedure and existing laws — Tort not established. 1 case
Negligence — Road traffic accident — Liability not in issue — Appeal on quantum Damages — Assessment — Loss of consciousness — Mild traumatic brain injury — Modest enhancement Damages — Assessment — Shoulder impingement — Functional limitation — Award enhanced Damages — Special damages — Physiotherapy — Strict proof — Award affirmed Damages — Future medical expenses — Arcoxia — Speculative claim — Duty to mitigate — Claim dismissed Appeal — Appellate restraint — Limited interference with quantum 1 case
Conspiracy to injure — Unlawful means conspiracy — Elements to prove — Combination, intention to injure, unlawful acts, resultant loss — Suspicious sequence of events insufficient — Evidence falling short of proving concerted agreement on balance of probabilities — Distinction between commercial opportunism and targeted conspiracy 1 case
Conspiracy (unlawful means) — Elements — Agreement — Intention to injure — Overt acts — Damage — Strict pleading requirements — Familial relationship — Whether sufficient to infer conspiracy Pleading — Fraud and dishonesty — Strict particularisation — General allegations insufficient — Inference versus fact — Failure to plead dishonesty, assistance and causal link 1 case
Vicarious liability — Whether landlord can be held vicariously liable for acts of tenant — Applicability of close connection test — Whether landlord-tenant relationship sufficient to impose liability 1 case
Conspiracy — Conspiracy to injure — Elements of conspiracy — Requirement of knowledge and intent for co-signatory of cheques 1 case
negligence — vehicle chassis number tempered with — what is the standard of reasonable care of PUSPAKOM in inspecting the car — whether PUSPAKOM ought to carry out tests beyond visual inspection. 1 case
Key Statutes
Federal Constitution
cited in 3 cases Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)
cited in 3 cases Rules of Court 2012
cited in 2 cases Penal Code (Cap 574)
cited in 1 case Criminal Procedure Code
cited in 1 case
cited in 1 case
Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)
cited in 1 case Government Proceedings Act 1956
cited in 1 case Contract Act 1950
cited in 1 case Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
cited in 1 case Limitation Act 1953 (Cap 254)
cited in 1 case Civil Law Act 1956
cited in 1 case Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)
cited in 1 case Court Distribution
Key People & Firms
Top Judges
Yusrin Faidz bin Yusoff 6 Asmah binti Musa 3 Shamsul Bahrin bin Abdul Manaf 3 Manira binti Mohd Nor 3 S.m. Komathy a/p Suppiah (pk) 2 Elaine Yap Chin Gaik 2 Muhammad Adam @ Edward bin Abdullah 2 Muhammad Adam bin Abdullah 2 Noradura binti Hamzah 2 Noor Hisham bin Ismail 2 Raja Segaran a/l S.krishnan 2 Ahmad bin Haji Maarop 1 Wira Aziah binti Ali 1 Hasan bin Lah 1 Md. Raus bin Sharif 1
Top Firms
V.P. Nathan & Partners 3 Gan, Ho & Razlan Hadri 3 B. mariammah & Co 2 Othman Hashim & Co 2 G Dorai & Co. 2 Palani, Ammal & Co 1 State Legal Advisor's Chambers 1 Jega Kumar & Partners 1 Kanaga, Suresh & Co. 1 Naicker & Associates 1 Ranizan Abdullah & Associates 1 Jabatan Peguam Negara 1 Anton & Chen 1 Wan Shahrizal, Hari & Co. 1 A. Arman & Co 1
Top Lawyers
Kajendra Balan 2 Mariammah D/O Bharathan 2 Lee Guo Wen 2 Ganesh Subramaniam 2 Lee Zhe Hui 2 P.A. Sharon 1 Norazlinawati Mohd Arshad 1 Siti Hanida Abd Kadir 1 K. Saravana Kumar 1 Suganthy Kunasekaran 1 J S Naicker 1 Ranizan bin Mokhtar 1 Muhammad Aliff Shafiq Bin Maskor 1 Norshalin Binti Anuar 1 Siti Syuhada Alwi 1
Cases
Page 2 of 2wa-22ncvc-174-03-2025
1. ) GENERALI INSURANCE MALAYSIA BERHAD 2. ) TAKAFUL IKHLAS GENERAL BERHAD 3. ) SS MOTOR CENTURY SDN. BHD. v 1. ) WAWASAN SINAR GEMILANG SDN. BHD. 2. ) Kua Guan Chai 3. ) Phun Booi Mooi
7 October 2025
MYHC
wa-12bncc-16-06-2023
1. ) TAN TEE HUI 2. ) Soon Siew Ling v DE FOOD CREATOR SDN BHD
24 September 2025
MYHC
j-01ncvcw-163-03-2023
SUSHILA RANI A/P RAMASAMY v 1. ) Kerajaan Malaysia 2. ) MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 3. ) Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Penjara Kluang
23 September 2025
MYCOA
da-12b-19-05-2023
PUSAT PEMERIKSAAN KENDERAAN BERKOMPUTER (PUSPAKOM) v 1. ) Sufrin Bin Mansor 2. ) MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD 3. ) FOCAL PARK SDN BHD
17 September 2025
MYHC
ba-23cy-5-02-2023
1. ) SITI FARHANA BINTI MOHD PAKEH 2. ) AHMAD FIRDAUS BIN MUHAMAD NGADI v SITI NUR AINIEN SOFIEYA BINTI MOHD ZUKI
2 June 2025
MYHC
ba-12b-51-05-2024
1. ) NUR FARIHA BINTI HAIMI (Menuntut sebagai isteri yang sah dan tanggungan yang sah kepada Mohd Helmi Bin Ngadimin (Simati) untuk kehilangan tanggungan, kesedihan dan dukacitaan serta kerugian perbelanjaan di bawah Seksyen 7, Akta Undang-Undang Sivil 1956 serta menuntut untuk faedah estet Simati di bawah Seksyen 8, Akta Undang-Undang Sivil 1956) 2. ) XXXX v SYED MUZAFFAR SHAH BIN SYED AZMAN SHAH
13 May 2025
MYHC
aa-21ncvc-18-06-2021
1. ) INTAN SHAHARZAD BINTI MOHD AZRI 2. ) AHMAD AZIB BIN AHMAD v 1. ) KERAJAAN MALAYSIA 2. ) PENGARAH HOSPITAL TELUK INTAN 3. ) DR KHAIRUL BAHARIN BIN MOHD BAHARUDDIN 4. ) DR EDWARD DANIEL A/L JACOB 5. ) KASMANI BIN KADIR 6. ) AHMAD HAILME BIN ABDUL HALIM
7 May 2025
MYHC
wa-22ncvc-732-11-2021
1. ) LEONG MING KWAI 2. ) GAN BEE AI v 1. ) CITIBANK BERHAD 2. ) LOW KAI XIAN 3. ) LIM SENG HAN 4. ) TAN CHIN WEI 5. ) TETUAN SHAHRIZAL & NASIR 6. ) KOO SHI XUN 7. ) SHAHRIZAL BIN ABD RAHMAN
5 December 2024
MYHC
ba-22ncvc-216-05-2021
SYARIKAT METAL INDUSTRIES SDN BHD v ANWAR EZZAD BIN ZAINAL PIHAK KETIGA Hasan @ Sharfuddin Bin Hamat
24 November 2024
MYHC
s-02ncvcw-1303-07-2021
1. ) Jeramas Sdn Bhd 2. ) Dato' Sri Kong Hoi Chieng v Wong Sze Phin @ Jimmy Wong
11 September 2024
MYCOA
ja-12b-46-06-2023
KOOGELESWARAN A/L A SOUNDARAJAN - seorang kurang upaya yang menuntut melalui ibunya KALAIVENI A/P THANGIAH sebagai wakil litigasi beliau v 1. ) NORZARINA BINTI ROSLAN 2. ) REDZUAN BIN PONIRIN
27 August 2024
MYHC
ja-12b-52-07-2023
1. ) NORZARINA BINTI ROSLAN 2. ) REDZUAN BIN PONIRIN v KOOGELESWARAN A/L A SOUNDARAJAN - seorang kurang upaya yang menuntut melalui ibunya KALAIVENI A/P THANGIAH sebagai wakil litigasi beliau
27 August 2024
MYHC
w-02ncvcw-1000-06-2022
Tan Sri Datuk Seri Mohd Hussin Bin Abd Hamid v XXXX
18 June 2024
MYCOA
aa-23ncvc-6-07-2019
LOGANATHAN A/L THIAGARAJAN v DR. LEE MUN TOONG
30 July 2023
MYHC
ka-22ncvc-98-12-2019
TAN KHAR ENG (Mendakwa Sebagai Pentadbir Estet Chow Soek See, Si Mati) v 1. ) Metro Kurnia Sdn Bhd 2. ) Dr Yeap Poay Wan 3. ) Cheong Kim Leong
16 May 2023
MYHC
21ncvc-27-06-2020
Mohd Sofi bin Abdul Ghafar [NRIC No.: 541118-04-5207] v 1. Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi 2. Kerajaan Malaysia
21 March 2021
MYHC
12b-45-03-2019
Teh Yet Poh [No. K/P: 801221-10-5544] v Teh Ming Choo [No. K/P: 860130-10-5442]
4 August 2020
MYHC
02f-108-10-2017j
Tenaga Nasional Berhad v Bukit Lenang Development Sdn Bhd
30 October 2018
MYFC
02f-100-12-2014s
DATUK HARRIS MOHD SALLEH … APPELLANT v 1. DATUK YONG TECK LEE (Sued in his personal capacity and as an officer of the 2nd Respondent) 2. SABAH PROGRESSIVE PARTY … RESPONDENT
25 October 2017
MYFC