Parties waive the right to object to 'without prejudice' negotiations by referencing them in an affidavit, leading to their admissibility.

[1] This is an application in court encl no 7 (encl 7) by the defendants (defendants) in this originating summons (OS) to expunge certain paragraphs and exhibits in an affidavit filed by the plaintiff (plaintiff) in support of the OS.

[2] Enclosure 7 is premised on the ground that the plaintiff has wrongly referred in his affidavit to "without prejudice" negotiations between the parties to settle this dispute amicably (Without Prejudice Negotiations) which is privileged and inadmissible as evidence. The sole issue that arises is whether the defendants have waived their right to object to the admissibility of Without Prejudice Negotiations contained in the plaintiff's affidavit.

B. Background

[3] The 1st defendant (1st defendant) and his wife are co-owners (Co-Owners) of a 2% storey semi-detached house erected on piece of land held under Qualified Title HS(D) 224473, PT No 849 (Property). The Co-Owners' family resides at the Property.

[4] The Co-Owners had assigned the ownership of the Property to Public Bank Bhd (Bank) to secure repayment of a loan granted by the Bank to the Co-Owners (Loan).

[5] The Co-Owners defaulted upon the Loan and the Bank proceeded to sell the Property by way of a public auction (Auction).

[6] At the Auction, the plaintiff has successfully purchased the Property at a price of RM2,000,000.00. The plaintiff is now the registered proprietor of the Property under the National Land Code.

[7] The plaintiff filed this OS for, among others, an order to compel the defendants to deliver possession of the Property to the plaintiff. In support of the OS, the plaintiff affirmed an affidavit on 3 December 2018 (the plaintiff's First Affidavit). Paragraph 9 of the plaintiff's First Affidavit had referred to Without Prejudice Negotiations as follows (in Malay and with grammatical errors):

"9. Saya seterusnya menyatakan bahawa sebagai pemunya berdaftar Hartanah tersebut, pihak saya telah atas dasar "goodwill" cuba untuk mengkehendaki Defendan-defendan tersebut memasuki satu Perjanjian Penyewaan dengan saya sekiranya Defendan- defendan ingin terus mendiami Hartanah tersebut. Namun tiada persetujuan dicapai kerana Defendan-defendan tidak bersetuju kepada terma-terma yang dikehendaki dan perjanjian penyewaan tidak berjaya ditandatangani. Sesalinan surat-menyurat antara peguamcara saya dan Tetuan Seah Balan Ravi & Co dilampirkan dan ditandakan secara kolektif sebagai "Ekshibit E"."

[Emphasis Added]

Exhibit E in the plaintiff's First Affidavit exhibited letters between solicitors for the plaintiff and the defendants which contained, among others, Without Prejudice Negotiations.

[8] The 1st defendant affirmed an affidavit on 27 December 2018 on behalf of the defendants (defendants' First Affidavit) to oppose the OS and to reply to the plaintiff's First Affidavit. I reproduce below paras 9 to 11 and 13 of the defendants' First Affidavit (in Malay and with grammatical errors):

"9. Penglibatan penting saya dengan plaintif dan peguamcaranya, satu Cik Chloe Lim, adalah seperti berikut:

i. Pada atau sekitar 19 Mei 2018, plaintif bersama agen hartanah, satu Cik Caryn Wee, telah datang untuk melihat hartanah tersebut berniat untuk membelinya.

ii. Pada atau sekitar 28 Ogos 2018, plaintif telah memaklumkan saya bahawa beliau adalah pembida bagi hartanah tersebut dan mencadangkan untuk menyewakan hartanah tersebut kepada saya pada kadar mesra ("friendly rate") di man