NORHASYIDAN MOHD NOR @ MOHAMAD HAZANI vs MOHD RIDHWAN ASMARA & ORS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 MarsdenLR 3290

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
NORHASYIDAN MOHD NOR @ MOHAMAD HAZANI – Appellant
Versus
MOHD RIDHWAN ASMARA & ORS – Respondent

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) to (!) outline the principles of appellate interference and the "plainly wrong" test for findings of fact. - (!) to (!) describe the approach to quantum review and when appellate intervention on damages is warranted. - (!) to (!) set out the appellate court’s conclusion that the trial judge’s liability findings were not plainly wrong and no collision was proved. - (!) to (!) discuss the quantum adjustment for head injuries from RM150,000 to RM75,000 and overall dismissal of damages due to liability outcome.

What is the standard of appellate interference with findings of fact in a civil tort case?

What is the appropriate approach to reviewing quantum of damages on appeal?

What is the court’s conclusion regarding whether the trial judge erred in liability findings and the resulting damages?

JUDGMENT

Tee Geok Hock JC:

Introduction

[1] The present case relates to an alleged collision of two motor vehicles in respect of which the trial court found that the Plaintiff has not proved any negligence on the part of the 1st Defendant in the alleged collision and thereafter held that it was unnecessary to find whether or not the claim was false in that no collision in fact has been proven.

[2] This is an appeal by the Plaintiff against the decision of the learned Session court Judge on liability in a judgment delivered after the full trial of the personal injury action wherein the Sessions court dismissed the Plaintiff's claims The 3rd Defendant, the insurance company, has made a cross-appeal against the quantum figures assessed provisionally by the Sessions court.

[3] The Plaintiff's liability appeal against the Sessions court's dismissal of the Plaintiff's claims was dismissed by this court on 19 February 2021, and the 3rd Defendant's quantum appeal was allowed in respect of one item of the quantum figures. The Plaintiff has appealed against this court's decision dated 19 February 2021.

Principles Of Appellate Interference

[4] In Abdul Halim bin A. Tambi v. Yong Kim Moon & Ors this

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 MarsdenLR 3290

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAMNORHASYIDAN MOHD NOR @ MOHAMAD HAZANI – AppellantVersusMOHD RIDHWAN ASMARA & ORS – Respondent

What is the standard of appellate interference with findings of fact in a civil tort case?

What is the appropriate approach to reviewing quantum of damages on appeal?

What is the court’s conclusion regarding whether the trial judge erred in liability findings and the resulting damages?

Cases Referred (2)

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
NORHASYIDAN MOHD NOR @ MOHAMAD HAZANI – Appellant
Versus
MOHD RIDHWAN ASMARA & ORS – Respondent