HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
AUMADA ENERGY & TECHNOLOGIES (M) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KENNY BERNARD SAW – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff seeks time extension for appeal. (Para 1) |
| 2. court dismisses application with costs. (Para 2) |
| 3. background facts of the industrial court case. (Para 3) |
| 4. plaintiff's arguments for abridgement. (Para 4) |
| 5. legal basis for application of time extension. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
(Enclosure 1)
Introduction
[1] In this Originating Summons (OS):
(1) The plaintiff seeks to be granted an abridgement of time to file and submit a Notice of Appeal against the Industrial Court Awad No 495 of 2024 [Kenny Bernard Saw v. Aumada Energy & Technologies (M) Sdn Bhd [2024] MELRU 495; [2024] 2 ILR 189] dated 3 April 2024 allegedly received by the plaintiff on 30 April 2024 in the Industrial Court Case No: 11/4-613/22 within 7 days from the date the Court's order.
(2) Cost and other prayers.
[2] On 28 January 2025, after considering all the cause papers and respective written submissions of the parties on a balance of probabilities, I hold that the plaintiff failed to discharge his burden to establish his case. Accordingly, I dismissed the plaintiff's application with costs of RM2,000.00 to be paid within 30 days from the date of this Order.
[2.1] Dissatisfied, the
Asian Pottery (Penang) Sdn Bhd v. Tan Siew Yong
Chia Wai Cheong v. Koh Ming Kwang
Hoh Kiang Ngan v. Mahkamah Perusahaan Malaysia & Anor
PJD Regency Sdn Bhd v. Tribunal Tuntutan Pembeli Rumah & Anor And Other Appeals
Goldhill Fortune Sdn Bhd lwn. Pemungut Duti Setem
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.