Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 MarsdenLR 1680

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MARZAIDI MOHAMMAD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMED AFFENDI KHAIRUDDIN AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
[Civil Appeal Nos: W-02(NCvC)(W)-1092-07-2023 & W-02(NCvC)(W)-1122-07-2023]

Petitioner Advocates:Norazali Nordin,Fey Aqis Mohd Khairuddin,Lailatul Fitriah Ma'at ,Respondent Advocate: GK Ganesan,Brijnandan Singh Bhar,Natasha Bhar,Jasween Kaur Dhaliwal,PavaaniTanggaveloo

The court affirmed that wrongful death claims under the Civil Law Act must be filed by the executor, and the plaintiffs retained rights to the Goodwill Payment, with jurisdiction to determine its distribution under the Faraid Order.

Headnote:(A) Civil Law Act 1956 - Section 7(2) - Montreal Convention 1999 - Wrongful death claim - The defendant filed Suit 435 personally instead of as executor, breaching statutory requirements. The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not relinquish their rights to the Goodwill Payment and had standing to pursue Suit 629. (Paras 10, 11, 46, 92)

(B) Jurisdiction - The civil courts have jurisdiction to declare the distribution of the Goodwill Payment according to the Faraid Order. (Paras 90, 92)

Facts of the case:
The deceased was a crew member of flight MH17, which crashed, leading to a wrongful death claim against Malaysia Airlines by the defendant. The plaintiffs, as legal heirs, sought a declaration regarding the distribution of the Goodwill Payment. (Paras 1-4, 9)

Findings of Court:
The learned Judicial Commissioner erred in dismissing the plaintiffs' claim in Suit 629, ruling that they had not relinquished their rights and had standing to pursue their claims. (Paras 46, 92)

Issues: The main issues included whether the plaintiffs relinquished their rights to bring action against Malaysia Airlines and whether they had standing to claim the Goodwill Payment. (Paras 58-60)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the defendant's action was improper as he did not act as executor, and the plaintiffs retained their rights to the Goodwill Payment under the Release Agreement. The civil courts could adjudicate the distribution under the Faraid Order. (Paras 68, 90)

Result: Appeals allowed; the High Court's decision in Suit 629 set aside and declarations sought by the plaintiffs granted. (Paras 114, 116)

Table of Content
1. fatal plane crash details and heirs (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. faraid order and legal actions (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. defendant's civil action under cla (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. defendant's filing issues and claims (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
5. intervention application and dismissal (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
6. mediation and settlement agreements (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
7. stakeholder agreement terms (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
8. release agreement implications (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
9. acknowledgment of goodwill payment (Para 28 , 29 , 30)
10. transfer of rights under release agreement (Para 31 , 32 , 33)
11. discontinuance of suit 435 (Para 34 , 35 , 36)
12. filing suit 629 for goodwill payment (Para 37 , 38 , 39)
13. counterclaims and procedural issues (Para 40 , 41 , 42)
14. high court's jurisdiction and findings (Para 43 , 44 , 45)
15. dismissal of claims and procedural issues (Para 46 , 47 , 48)
16. appeals filed by plaintiffs and defendant (Para 49 , 50 , 51)
17. defendant's arguments against plaintiffs (Para 52 , 53 , 54)
18. issues surrounding relinquishment of rights (Para 58 , 59 , 60)
19. legal interpretation of waiver of rights (Para 61 , 62 , 63)
20. statutory rights under cla (Para 64 , 65 , 66)
21. estoppel in legal claims (Para 67 , 68 , 69)
22. negotiations and agreements context (Para 70 , 71 , 72)
23. rights under the stakeholder agreement (Para 73 , 74 , 75)
24. claims under the release agreement (Para 76 , 77 , 78)
25. defendant's obligations under agreements (Para 79 , 80 , 81)
26. court's view on plaintiffs' claims (Para 82 , 83 , 84)
27. jurisdiction of civil courts (Para 88 , 89 , 90)
28. court's decision on plaintiffs' claims (Para 91 , 92 , 93)
29. defendant's procedural appeals (Para 94 , 95 , 96)
30. analysis of procedural issues (Para 97 , 98 , 99)
31. nullity of writ and statement of claim (Para 100 , 101 , 102)
32. preliminary objections in court (Para 103 , 104 , 105)
33. authority to bring suit 629 (Para 106 , 107 , 108)
34. plaintiffs' rights in suit 629 (Para 109 , 110 , 111)
35. conclusion of the appeals (Para 112 , 113 , 114)

JUDGMENT

Faizah Jamaludin JCA:

A. INTRODUCTION

[1] The late Mastura binti Mustafa (the "Deceased") was one of the crew members of the ill-fated flight MH17, operated by Malaysia Airlines System Berhad ("Malaysia Airlines"), which crashed near Hrabove in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine on 17 July 2014.

[2] Flight MH17 was a scheduled passenger flight from Amsterdam Schiphol International Airport, Netherlands, to Kuala Lumpur International Airport. The aircraft was shot down by a surface-to-air missile when it was flying over Eastern Ukraine. All the passengers and crew on board the flight perished in the crash.

[3] At the time of her death, the Deceased left the following legal heirs:

(i) Mohamed Affendi bin Khairuddin ("the defendant") - her husband;

(ii) Muhammad Muhriz bin Marzaidi ("the Child") - her only child from her marriage to her ex-husband, Marzaidi bin Mohammad ("the 1st plaintiff "); and

(iii) Mustafa bin Ab Samad ("Mustafa") - her father.

[4] The Deceased was the defendant's second wife. They were married in Songkhla, Thailand, on 25 June 2013, approximately one year prior to her death. Their marriage was registered on 10 March 2014 under the Akta Undang-Undang Keluarga Islam Wilayah-Wilayah Persekutuan 1984 pursuant to an Order of the Syariah High Court of Wilayah-Wilayah Persekutuan.

[5] At the time of the Deceased's death, the Child was 10 years old, and Mustafa was 82 years old.

Faraid Order

[6] Following the Deceased's death, the defendant filed for and obtained a Faraid Order (Perintah Faraid) on 5 February 2015 from the Negeri Sembilan Syariah High Court for the division of the Deceased's property among her legal heirs. Under the Faraid Order, the Negeri Sembilan Syariah High Court ordered that the Deceased's estate be distributed among her legal heirs in the following proportions:

[7] On 9 February 2015, the 1st plaintiff was appointed as the guardian to the Child's assets (penjaga kepada harta-harta yang dim

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 MarsdenLR 1680

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAMARZAIDI MOHAMMAD & ANOR – AppellantVersusMOHAMED AFFENDI KHAIRUDDIN AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent[Civil Appeal Nos: W-02(NCvC)(W)-1092-07-2023 & W-02(NCvC)(W)-1122-07-2023]

The court affirmed that wrongful death claims under the Civil Law Act must be filed by the executor, and the plaintiffs retained rights to the Goodwill Payment, with jurisdiction to determine its distribution under the Faraid Order.

Cases Referred (4)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MARZAIDI MOHAMMAD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMED AFFENDI KHAIRUDDIN AND ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
[Civil Appeal Nos: W-02(NCvC)(W)-1092-07-2023 & W-02(NCvC)(W)-1122-07-2023]