Back
2013 MarsdenLR 668
HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
MARY ROSALINE P AROKIASAMY & ORS – Appellant
Versus
TEH LAY TIN & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: K-05-70-2011 & K-05-71-2011]
Claims that are speculative, lacking in evidence, and insufficient to establish a legitimate cause of action can be summarily dismissed as frivolous and vexatious.
Headnote:(A) Rules of Court 2012 - Order 18 Rule 19 - Application to strike out claim - The claim was struck out as scandalous, frivolous, and vexatious due to the lack of evidentiary support for allegations of fraud, illegality, and breach of trust. The claim's foundation was deemed wholly speculative and failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action. (Paras 1-3, 15-17)
(B) Legal standard for striking out - The court emphasized that powers of summary dismissal are to be exercised with utmost caution, only in plain and obvious cases where claims are obviously unsustainable. (Paras 10-14)
Facts of the case:
The plaintiff sought numerous declarations and injunctions related to the ownership of a land title, arguing the preceding transactions were fraudulent. The defendants contended the plaintiff's claims failed to substantiate allegations of fraud after previous judgments found in their favor.
Findings of Court:
The court held the plaintiff's claim as unsustainable, stating that claims must provide sufficient factual basis to proceed. Summary dismissal was appropriate given the lack of evidence supporting the allegations against the defendants.
Issues: Whether the plaintiff's allegations constituted a valid cause of action for fraud and related claims, and if the claims were suitable for strike out.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that a claim must clearly raise a substantive issue for substantive trial; without factual backing, the claim was rightly struck out.
Result: The application to strike out the claim was allowed, with costs awarded.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application to strike out claims (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. history and ownership of the land (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. plaintiff's arguments on application merits (Para 9) |
| 4. criteria for summary dismissal and principle of estoppel (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. findings on estoppel and cause of action (Para 15) |
[1] This is an application by the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Defendants to strike out the Plaintiff's claim pursuant to O 18 r 19 Rules of 2012 on the grounds that the claim is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and / or it is an abuse of the process of Court.
[2] The plaintiff's claim as appears in the statement of claim is for the following declaratory reliefs and damages:
1. A declaration that the transfer of title of a piece of land known as GRN 20064 Lot Mukim Klang vide transfer of title no 78577/2009 registered on 8 September 2009 under the name of 2nd defendant is null and void and all endorsement thereto be deleted and erased from the 8th Defendant's records;
2. A declaration that the transfer of title known as GRN 20064 Lot Mukim Klang vide transfer of title no 105795/2009 registered on 16 november 2009 under the name of 3rd defendant is null and void and all the endorsement related thereto be deleted and erased from the 8th Defendant's records;
3. A declaration that the transfer of title known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang vide transfer of title no 16633/2010 registered on 2 March 2010 under the name of 2nd defendant is null and void and all the endorsement thereto should be deleted and erased from the 8th Defendant records;
4. An order that the 1st Defendant be released as a trustee on the piece of land as a known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang;
5. In the alternative, the 1st Defendant be terminated as a trustee on the piece of land known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang;
6. An order that the 1st Plaintiff, 2nd Plaintiff and the 3rd Plaintiff be appointed as trustees on the land known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang;
7. An order that the 1st Plaintiff, 2nd Plaintiff and the 3rd Plaintiff be registered as trustees in the document of title known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang in the Register of Title of 8th Defendant in the replacement of 1st Defendant and the two deceased ; late Ng Yeow Chee and late Tan Teck Sim;
9. An order that all the caveats entered in the document of title known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang be nullified and/or be set aside after the judgement for the plaintiffs;
10. An injunction to restrain the 4th Defendan and/or his agents and/or his nominees to administer and/or transact and or sell and/or mortgage and/or charge and or lease ad/or transfer the land known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang;
11. An injuction to restrain the 8th Defendan and/or his employees and/or setting aside the Registrar Caveat entered on 2 July 2010 on the title known as GRN 20064 Lot 10454 Mukim Klang Daerah Klang until the decision of this case;
12. General damages;
13. Interest on the general damages at the rate and of 4%period from the date of judgment until final settlement;
14. Cost of action and;
15. Other appropriate equitable relief.
[3] For the purpose of the hearing of this application-encl (26) - the following documents were considered by this Court :
(i) The affidavit in support of the application affirmed by Yaakob bin Suratman on 24 April 2013 - (encl 27)
(ii) The affidavit in reply affirmed by Amu A/P Mathawan on 16 May 2013 - (Encl 34)
(iii) The affidavit in reply by the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th Defendant affirmed by Yaakob bin Suratman dated 29 May 2013 (encl 35)
(iv) The affidavit in reply affirmed by Amu a/p Mathawan on 10 June 2013 (encl 36)
(v) The affidavit in reply affirmed by Amu a/p Mathawan on 15 July 2013 (encl 38)
Background Facts
[4] On 2 March 2010 the 4th defendant became the registered proprietor of the piece of land held under/Geran 20064, Lot 10454 Mukim Klang, Daerah Klang, Negeri Selangor (the said lan
