The High Court retains jurisdiction where the cause of action arose, and modern communication technology diminishes the importance of physical court attendance.

JUDGMENT

Moses Susayan JC:

Introduction

[1] This case involves a civil dispute between Pua Kok Hong (Plaintiff) and Puah Choon Wei (Defendant) for the recovery of a sum of money by the Plaintiff from the Defendant. The Defendant filed an application to transfer the case from the Ipoh High Court to the Shah Alam High Court, on the basis that the cause of action accrued in Shah Alam because the agreement was executed in Shah Alam. Alternatively, did the cause of action accrue at the place where the default of payment occurred, which is Ipoh, where the Plaintiff was at the material time?

Background Facts

[2] The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant owes RM1,871,900.00 from a loan agreement dated 9 May 2023, along with legal costs, interest, and additional expenses. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant agreed to return the monies by instalments and, in fact, had made a few payments to the Plaintiff in Ipoh where he currently is and conducting business. Therefore, the Plaintiff takes the position that two consecutive defaults in payment constituted a breach, where the cause of action accrued in Ipoh, where the Plaintiff was at the material time.

[3] The Defendant, on the other hand, residing in Sungai Buloh,denies the validity of the loan, stating the funds were investments in forex trading with WL IT Solutions Sdn Bhd, made willingly by the Plaintiff. The Defendant argues that the case should be transferred to Shah Alam, where the cause of action arose and his residence is located within the jurisdiction of the Shah Alam High Court.

[4] The basis of the Defendant's application for transfer of the case from the Ipoh High Court to the Shah Alam High Court centres on several key points. Firstly, the Defendant argues that the cause of action accrued from Sungai Buloh, where the loan agreement was executed, and it is also where the Defendant currently resides. Therefore, Defendant submits that the High Court of Shah Alam is the appropriate jurisdiction to hear and dispose of the matter. The Defendant further submits that it would be more convenient and less costly for the Defendant to attend the Shah Alam Court instead of the Ipoh High Court. The Defendant disputes the Plaintiff's claim of residence in Ipoh, asserting that the Plaintiff resides in Seremban. The Plaintiff, on the other hand, opposes the transfer of proceeding, arguing that the cause of action vis-a-vis default accrued in Ipoh, where he resides and conducts business. He asserts that the Ipoh High Court has jurisdiction and that their material witnesses are located in Ipoh. The Plaintiff contends that the Ipoh High Court is the appropriate forum for the trial.

Issue For The Court's Determination

[5] There is only one issue for determination by this Court on the Defendant's application, that is:

"Which of the branch of High Court in Malaya is the forum of convenience to hear and dispose of the matter?"

Merits Of The Application

[6] Under s 23 of the Courts of Judicature Act )1964 (CJA), the High Court is vested with powers prior to Malaysia Day and additional powers by any written law within its local jurisdiction. The word "local jurisdiction" in s 23 according to s 3, Interpretation provision of the CJA means any High Courtin Malaya, the territory comprised in the States of Malaya, namely, Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor, Terengganu and the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. Further, the Schedule to s 25(2), specifically grants the High Court the power to transfer any proceedings to any other Court. Such transfers are conducted as prescribed by O 57 r 4 of the Rules of 2012, ensuring proper procedures are followed. I append below the relevant provisions of s 23 of the CJA and O 57 of the Rules of 2012.

Civil jurisdiction-general

23.(1) Subject to the limitations contained in art 128 of the Constitution, the High Court shall have jurisdiction to try all civil proceedings where:-

(a) the cause of action arose;

(b) the defendan