SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2017 MarsdenLR 139

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
YOKOMASU MARKETING SDN BHD & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
CHOR TSE MIN – Respondent


[1] The Appellants ("the Defendants in the High Court") had appealed against the decision of the High Court in Penang which allowed the Respondent's ("the Plaintiff in the High Court") claim with costs. Vide the decision dated 29th September 2015, the Appellants were ordered to pay the Respondent damages for defamation in the sum of RM200,000.00. The 1st Appellant was further ordered to pay the sum of RM76,000.00 being the outstanding salary and directorship's fee totaling RM2,000.00 per month from August 2012 to date of judgment. Costs and interests were also ordered against the Defendants.

[2] Having perused the records of appeal, the written submissions filed herein and having heard the arguments of both learned Counsel for the Respondent and the Appellants we allowed the appeal with costs of RM30,000.00 here and below.

[3] Our reasons for doing so now follow.

[4] For ease of reference the parties will be referred to as they were described in the High Court.

Brief Background Facts

[5] The 1st Defendant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1965 which deals with wholesale and retail sales of automotive parts, batteries and accessories.

[6] The 1st Defendant was established

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top