The appellate court must ensure damages awarded are justifiable, reasonable, and reflect precedents to prevent excessive awards.

Introduction

[1] The Sessions Court held that the Plaintiff-pillion rider was entitled to recover 100% from the Defendant/Surendran (the rider of a motorbike which collided with another motorbike) for negligence in causing a road accident and that the Defendant was entitled to recover 50% from the Third Parties (including Umar Ardi, the rider of the other motorbike in the collision), and then awarded various heads of damages in favour of the Plaintiff/Muhammad Aizat.

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

[3] By way of written letter dated 7 November 2022 (Enclosure 23), the Appellant/Defendant's counsel has confirmed that the Appellant/Defendant did not pursue the liability appeal anymore (ie the percentage of negligence held by the trial judge) and would still pursue their appeal on damages and quantum issues.

[4] After having read the parties' written submissions and having heard the parties' respective counsel, this Court on 12 January 2023 allowed parts of the Appellant/Defendant's appeal on the amounts of five (5) heads of damages and dismissed the appeal which relates to the other eleven (11) heads of damages.

[5] Unhappy with the said decision, the Respondent/Plaintiff has in turn appealed to the Court of Appeal. This Court's Grounds of Judgment here is lengthy for an accident case because there are two important heads of special damages, namely costs of special shoes (shoe raise) costs of medical treatment at private hospital, and two legal principles on inflation and accelerated payment (present value of future money) which warrant a detailed analysis and discussion in order to clarify the relevant topics of law.

Law On Appellate Intervention In Award Of Damages

[6] 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, p 616-617, followed in Collector of Stamp Duties v. Ng Fah In, [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.

[7] 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] 2 MLJ 22; [1985] CLJ (Rep) 323; followed by the Court of Appeal in Laksmana Realty Sdn Bhd v. Goh Eng Hwa; [2006] 1 MLJ 675 at p 682 para [16]; [2005] 4 CLJ 871; [2006] 1 AMR 461.

[8] The Court of Appeal in the case of Sambaga Valli KR Ponnusamy v. Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur & Ors And Other Appeal, [2018] 1 MLJ 784 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 principle;

(b) misapprehended the facts; and

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

[9] In Aziz bin Zakaria & Anor v. Rusli bin Ijam the High Court summarised the principles and the approach in t