GOH POH YOKE vs AMBANK (M) BERHAD & ANOR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 MarsdenLR 1632

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
GOH POH YOKE – Appellant
Versus
AMBANK (M) BERHAD & ANOR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Christie Soosay Nathan,Sherwin Raphael,Mohamad Shahrizzat Amadan ,Respondent Advocate: Rutheran Sivagnanam,Chong Yi Zhen

Table of Content
1. plaintiff's claim based on service agreement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. court's direction on inadmissibility of expert report. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
3. expert report lacks admissibility under evidence act. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 20)
4. court retains power to interpret legal documents. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
5. court's direction on witness statements for relevance. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
6. summary of pre-trial management directions. (Para 33)

Adlin Abdul Majid J:

A. Introduction

[1] This judgment relates to the following directions given by this court, in the course of case management:

a. The inadmissibility of the expert report filed by the plaintiff; and

b. The filing of witness statements or proposed questions for witnesses, for the purpose of trial.

[2] The reasons for the directions given by the court are set out below.

B. Background Facts

[3] The plaintiff's claim against the defendants arises under a service agreement dated 2 November 2023, entered into between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant ("Service Agreement"‌). Pursuant to the Service Agreement, the plaintiff was engaged as an exempt dealer's personnel, with the job description and duties set

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 MarsdenLR 1632

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPURGOH POH YOKE – AppellantVersusAMBANK (M) BERHAD & ANOR – Respondent

Cases Referred (4)

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
GOH POH YOKE – Appellant
Versus
AMBANK (M) BERHAD & ANOR – Respondent