Abdul Malik Ishak J:

Introduction

By way of an application in encl. 12 styled as the summons in chambers, the third defendant by the name of Zulkefli bin Majid sought for the following prayers:

(i) that para. 11 of the statement of claim be struck out;

(ii) that the written admission of the third defendant referred to in para. 11 of the statement of claim be excluded from disclosure and rendered inadmissible as evidence in this action; and

(iii) that the costs of this application be borne by the plaintiff.

The third defendant's application in encl. 12 was made pursuant to O. 18 r. 19(1)(b), (c) and (d) of the Rules of the High Court 1980 ("RHC") and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court as encapsulated in O. 92 r. 4 of the RHC.

In its original text, para. 11 of the statement of claim was worded in this way:

Pada 17.7.2003, Defendan Ketiga telahpun membuat satu pengakuan bertulis kepada Plaintif tanpa sebarang ugutan atau paksaan bahawa beliau mengaku iaitu lagu ciplak hasil ciptaannya telah diambil dari lagu asal Plaintif. (Plaintif akan merujuk kepada pengakuan bertulis tersebut ketika perbicaraan penuh kelak).

The English language translation of para. 11 of the statement of claim was not provided for but, in simple English, it would be worded in this way:

On 17.7.2003, the third Defendant without any threat or force had made a written admission to the Plaintiff admitting that he had infringed the copyright song belonging to the Plaintiff. (The said written admission will be referred to in the course of the trial).

The written admission by the third defendant in the Malay language has been exhibited as exh. "HBH1" to the affidavit of the plaintiff that was affirmed on 2 March 2004 as seen in encl. 13. It was a hand written admission and it was phrased in this way:

PENGAKUAN BERTULIS

Bahawasanya saya ZULKEFLI MAJID NO K/P 720901-14-5107 (AIMAN) membuat pengakuan, yang lagu bertajuk "Tetap Di Sini" nyanyian Siti Nurhaliza di dalam video klip 'Paloh' dan album Best of Original Soundtrack adalah satu lagu yang telah diambil dari lagu asal yang bertajuk "KEMBALI" nyanyian Mary Doreen Jackson hasil ciptaan Hadi Bin Hassan I/C 7007327.

Pengakuan bertulis ini dibuat atas kerelaan saya sendiri tanpa apa-apa jenis paksaan dan ugutan oleh mana-mana pihak.

Pengakuan oleh Zulkefli Majid 720901-14-5107

17/07/03 - 7.45 malam

t.t. (Illegible)

Saksi (1) MOHD ADLI OTHMAN

I/C: 780325-02-6111 t.t. (Illegible)

Saksi (2) Shamsuddin Amir Hussain

I/C: 5482586 t.t. (Illegible)

Saksi (3) OTHMAN MAHMOOD

I/C: 731026-01-6625 t.t. (Illegible).

In due course, the learned Senior Assistant Registrar ("SAR") heard the third defendant's application in encl. 12 and she dismissed it forthwith. The SAR also ordered that costs be costs in the cause. Aggrieved by the decision of the SAR, the third defendant filed an appeal to the judge in chambers as reflected in encl. 14.

Now, all letters written and all oral communications made between the parties during a dispute for the purpose of settling the dispute (Grace v. Baynton [1877] 21 Sol Jo 631; Kitcat v. Sharp [1882] 48 LT 64; Re Daintrey, ex parte Holt [1893] 2 QB 116; and E Hulton & Co Ltd v. Chadwick, Taylor & Co [1919] 122 LT 66, HL) which are expressed or proved to have been made "without prejudice" cannot, in law, be admitted in evidence (Waldridge v. Kennison [1794] 1 Esp 143; Paddock v. Forrester [1842] 3 Scott NR 715; Whiffen v. Hartwright [1848] 11 Beav 111; Hoghton v. Hoghton [1852] 15 Beav 278; Re Daintrey, ex parte Holt (supra); Cory v. Bretton [1830] 4 C & P 462; and Re River Steamer Co, Mitchell's Claim [1871] 6 Ch App 822 at 831). This privilege is unique. It covers not only the particular letter in question but also extends to all the subsequent parts of the same correspondence on both sides even though they are not expressed to be "without prejudice" (Paddock v. Forrester (supra);Re Harris, ex parte Harris [1875] 44 LJ Bey 33; Peacock v. Harper [1877] 26 WR 109; Oliver v. Nautilus