Appellate courts may intervene in damage awards only if the trial court acted on a wrong principle or misapprehended facts, ensuring compensation reflects fair reparation for injuries.

Introduction

[1] The Sessions Court awarded various heads of damages in favour of the Plaintiff in this accident case.

[2] Dissatisfied with the said decision, the Defendant has appealed to this Court on the issues of damages and quantum thereof.

[3] After having read the parties' written submissions and having heard the parties' respective counsel, this Court on 21 August 2023 allowed parts of the Appellant/Defendant's appeal on the amounts of three (3) heads of damages and dismissed the appeal which relates to the other heads of damages.

[4] Dissatisfied with the decision, both the Appellant/Defendant and the Respondent/Plaintiff have filed separate notices of appeal to appeal against the respective parts of the decision which are not favourable to them respectively.

Principles On Appellate Intervention

[5] In an appeal against award of damages or compensation, the appellate Court may intervene where it is satisfied that the trial judge has acted on a wrong principle of law, or has misapprehended the facts, or has for other reasons made a wholly erroneous estimate of the damages suffered: House of Lords in Davies v. Powell Duffryn Assoc Collieries [1942] AC, pp 616-617, followed in Collector of Stamp Duties v. Ng Fah In [1980] 1 MLRA 722; [1981] 1 MLJ 288 at p 292A; or to be a wholly wrong estimate of the damages, the amount awarded must manifestly be either excessively high or excessively low.

[6] An omission on the part of the trial judge to consider some relevant matters or he had admitted for the purpose of assessment some irrelevant considerations or a misdirection of law are examples of having acted on a wrong principle of law or having misapprehended the facts which justifies appellate interference on the award of damages or the quantum of damages: Supreme Court in Tan Kuan Yau v. Suhindrimani 1985 MarsdenLR 201 ; 1985 MarsdenLR 649 ; [1985] 3 CLJ (Rep) 323 followed by the Court of Appeal in Laksmana Realty Sdn Bhd v. Goh Eng Hwa 2005 MarsdenLR 2135 ; [2006] 1 MLJ 675; 2005 MarsdenLR 2463 ; at p 682 para [16].

[7] The Court of Appeal in the case of Sambaga Valli KR Ponnusamy v. Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur & Ors And Other Appeal 2017 MarsdenLR 3036 ; 2025 MarsdenLR 6517 ; [2018] 4 AMR 745 emphasised regarding appellate intervention in the award of damages that:

'[8] The Court of Appeal may interfere with the quantum of damages awarded by the judge only if it is shows that the latter:

(a) acted on the wrong principles

(b) misapprehended the facts; and

(c) had for these or other reasons made a wholly erroneous estimate of his damages.

[8] In Aziz Zakaria & Anor v. Rusli Ijam 2022 MarsdenLR 292 the High Court summarised the principles and the approach in the following words:

'[6] The principles which allow an appellate Court to interfere with an award of damages are well established. The appellate Court will interfere where the Court below has: (i) acted on a wrong principle of law or has misapprehended the facts; and (ii) made a wholly erroneous estimate of the damages either by taking into account irrelevant considerations or omitting t