HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
NASUDI BUJANG & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
FATIN NURAQIDAH AZHAR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal status and procedural issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. circumstances of the road traffic accident. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. analysis of witness testimonies. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. physical evidence and accident analysis. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. probabilities of negligence and liability. (Para 17 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. appellate review of trial facts. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 7. apportionment of liability decision. (Para 25) |
| 8. arguments related to cross appeal on quantum. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
Introduction
[1] This is an appeal by the 1st Defendant (D1) and 2nd Defendant (D2), the driver and owner of a car, who were found 100% liable for a road traffic accident on 28 February 2018 that injured the Plaintiff, a motorcyclist. Plaintiff cross appealed for a particular item of future expense not allowed by the trial Judge - customized insoles and prosthetic toe amounting to RM651,330.00 over a period of 50 years.
[2] There is a question pending at the Court of Appeal, whether that cross appeal is competent, ie if it should have been filed as a separate Notice of Appeal. A previous High Court Judge had dismissed a Preliminary Objection raised by Defendants to t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.