Back
2015 MarsdenLR 2459
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
A SANTAMIL SELVI ALAU MALAY & ORS – Appellant
Versus
DATO SRI MOHD NAJIB TUN ABDUL RAZAK & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: 22NCVC-281-06-2014]
Parties must plead details of conspiracy with clarity, as mere allegations are insufficient to establish a cause of action.
Headnote:The Court heard multiple striking out applications based on the Rules of Court 2012, focusing on whether the plaintiffs' claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action. The Court determined that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi and failed to plead the essentials of conspiracy adequately. Ultimately, the action against the defendants was struck out with costs. The core issues were centered around the pleading of conspiracy to injure and the plaintiffs' ability to maintain the suit. The Court emphasized the importance of specific and detailed pleadings in conspiracy claims, highlighting that mere allegations are insufficient. The plaintiffs' failure to meet the necessary pleading standards resulted in the striking out of their claims.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. multiple defendants and their roles in a complex case. (Para 1 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. importance of locus standi in legal actions. (Para 30 , 42 , 47) |
| 3. requirements for pleading conspiracy. (Para 32 , 39 , 90) |
| 4. outcome of the action due to failure to plead properly. (Para 96 , 98) |
[1] There are eight striking out applications before me premised on O 18 r 19(1)(b) and/or (d) of the Rules of 2012 and/or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court, for orders to strike out the respondents'/plaintiffs' writ and statement of claim ("SOC") on the grounds that it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action, scandalous, frivolous and vexatious and/or an abuse of the process of the Court.
[2] The applications are as follows:
(i) Enclosure 17 is the application dated 4 August 2014 by the 1st and 2nd defendants pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a) or (b) and (d) of the Rules of 2012 (ROC) for an order to strike out the plaintiff's writ and statement of claim ("SOC"). The application is supported by the affidavit affirmed by Dato' Seri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak on 4 August 2014.
[3] For the purpose of the hearing of encl 17, the following documents were considered by this Court:
(i) Amended writ and statement of claim dated 23 June 2014 (encls 9 and 10);
(ii) The 1st and 2nd defendants' application under O 18 r 19 of the ROC dated 4 August 2014 (encl 17);
(iii) The 1st and 2nd defendants' affidavit in support of encl 17 by Dato' Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak affirmed on 4 August 2014 (encl 18);
(iv) Plaintiffs' affidavit in reply affirmed on 10 September 2014 (encl 37);
(v) The 1st and 2nd defendants' affidavit in reply affirmed on 25 September 2014 (encl 40); and
(vi) The affidavit affirmed by Chia Keng Hock affirmed on 8 October 2014 (encl 45).
The Grounds Of The Application
(1) The said amended SOC discloses no cause of action against 1st and 2nd defendants; or
(2) It is scandalous, frivolous and vexatious; and
(3) Abuse of the process of the Court.
(ii) Enclosure 21 is the application dated 5 August 2014 by the 3rd defendant pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a) or (b) and/or (d) of the Rules of 2012 (ROC) for an order to strike out the plaintiff's writ and statement of claim ("SOC"). The application is supported by the affidavit affirmed by Ahmad Johari bin Abdul Razak on 4 August 2014 (encl 22).
The Grounds Of The Application
(1) The plaintiffs have not pleaded any unlawful act committed by the 3rd defendant;
(2) No link between the single pleaded act of the 3rd defendant and the alleged damage; and
(3) The 1st plaintiff does not have locus standi to bring this action.
(iii) Enclosure 19 is the application dated 5 August 2014 by the 4th defendant pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) of ROC for an order to strike out the plaintiffs' writ and statement of claim ("SOC"). The application is supported by the affidavit affirmed by Dato' Mohd Nazim bin Tun Abdul Razak on 5 August 2014 (encl 20).
The Grounds Of The Application
(1) The plaintiffs have not pleaded any unlawful act committed by the 3rd defendant.
(2) No link between the single pleaded act of the 3rd defendant and the alleged damage.
(3) The 1st plaintiff does not have locus standi to bring this action.
(iv) Enclosure 23 is the application dated 5 August 2014 by the 5th and 6th defendants pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) of ROC for an order to strike out the plaintiffs' writ and amended SOC. The application is supported by the affidavit affirmed by Tan Sri Cecil Wilbert Mohanaraj Abraham and Sunil Abraham on 1 August 2014 (encl 24).
(v) Enclosure 25 is the application dated 5 August 2014 by the 7th defendant pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) of ROC for an order to strike out the plaintiffs' writ and amended SOC. The application is supported by the affidavit affirmed by Zainal Abidin bin Muhayat 5 August 2014 (encl 26).
(vi) Enclosure 33 is the application dated 20 August 2014 by the 8th defendant pursuant to O 18 r 19(1)(a), (b), (c) an
