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

2012 MarsdenLR 1139

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
VOO NYUK FAH & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
LAM YAT KHEONG & ANOR – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Norbert Yapp,Tracy Voo ,Respondent Advocate: Michael Denis Tan

Table of Content
1. chronology of case and judgments. (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3)
2. assessment of damages and judicial discretion. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. review of judge in chambers' reasoning. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
4. final dismissal of the appeal. (Para 14)

[1] This is an appeal by the plaintiffs/appellants against the decision of Judge In Chambers over the sole issue of assessment of damages. Prior to that, it was the defendants/respondents who appealed to the Judge In Chambers against the decision of the Senior Assistant Registrar ("SAR"). The whole matter on the assessment of damages, emanated from the decision in the substantive civil suit between the parties, given on 4 April 2002.

The chronology of events leading to this appeal are as follows:

1. The Writ of Summons was filed by the plaintiffs on 22 April 1999.

2. After a full trial, the High Court gave judgment in favour of the plaintiffs on 4 April 2002.

3. The SAR gave her decision on the quantum of damages, after holding on enquiry and assessment hearing, on 23 November 2005.

4. Not satisfied with the said SAR's decision, the defendants filed an appeal to Judge In Chambers on 2 December 2005.

5. The Judge In Chambers, allowe

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