KHK ADVERTISING SDN BHD vs SIERA MANAGEMENT SDN BHD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 2680

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KHK ADVERTISING SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SIERA MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Khoo Guan Hua,Melissa Long ,Respondent Advocate: Mohd Izral Khairy

Table of Content
1. appeal regarding judgment of malicious prosecution. (Para 1 , 3)
2. uncontested background facts of winding-up proceedings. (Para 6 , 7 , 20)
3. court's findings on elements required for malicious prosecution. (Para 21 , 22 , 42)
4. defendant must prove malicious prosecution elements. (Para 23 , 24)
5. legal process should not be abused. (Para 30 , 34)
6. proof of damages and elements for malicious prosecution critical. (Para 46 , 48)
7. clarification on when proceedings can be considered terminated. (Para 50 , 63 , 71)
8. conclusion on appeal and cross-appeal outcomes. (Para 91 , 92 , 93)

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the learned High Court Judge who had allowed the respondent's claim for malicious prosecution against the appellant.

[2] The respondent had also filed a cross-appeal against the decision of the learned judge who had dismissed its claim for the tort of abuse of legal process.

[3] At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal and cross-appeal, we allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal with costs of RM50,000 here and below to the appellant and ordered that the deposit be refunded.

[4] In this judgment the appellant an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 2680

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAKHK ADVERTISING SDN BHD – AppellantVersusSIERA MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KHK ADVERTISING SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
SIERA MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Respondent