2014 MarsdenLR 602

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DATUK SERI TIONG KING SING – Appellant
Versus
DATUK SERI ONG TEE KEAT & ANOR – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)-1802-08/2013]

An order made during trial proceedings regarding evidence admissibility is not appealable if it does not dispose of the parties' rights, as per the Courts of Judicature Act.

Headnote:(A) Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Section 67(1) - Appeal against denial to compel disclosure of sources - The claimant's application to compel disclosure was dismissed by the High Court, ruling the decision non-appealable as it was made during trial proceedings. The court emphasized that such rulings do not constitute a 'decision' under the Act. (Paras 9-12)

(B) Evidence Act 1950 - Section 136 and 167 - Issues concerning admissibility and relevancy of evidence - The trial court maintains authority over these rulings until the conclusion of the trial process, after which an appellate court may intervene. (Paras 15-16)

Facts of the case:
The appellant sought to compel a journalist to disclose the sources of defamatory statements published in an article; however, as the journalist was only a witness, the scope of appeal was questioned.

Findings of Court:
The appeal was deemed incompetent as it pertained to a ruling made during trial.

Issues: Whether the High Court's dismissal of the application to disclose sources can be appealed.

Ratio Decidendi: The ruling by the High Court was seen as interim, lacking finality, thus not appealable under the CJA's definition of a decision.

Result: Appeal dismissed.