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

2014 MarsdenLR 461

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PANG YEOW CHOW – Appellant
Versus
ADVANCE SPECIALIST TREATMENT ENGINEERING SDN BHD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. professional negligence in solicitor's attendance. (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3)
2. limitation period and accrual of cause of action. (Para 4 , 5)
3. evaluating reasonable prospect of success. (Para 6 , 7)
4. impact of solicitor's negligence on client. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
5. pleadings and burden of proof regarding limitation. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
6. background details of the negligence case. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
7. appeal arguments and legal principles involved. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
8. court's guidance on negligence and claims. (Para 22)

[1] The appellants (defendant) appeal and the respondents (plaintiff) cross-appeal which relates to professional negligence of solicitor in not attending court on the day of hearing which resulted in the suit being struck out came up for hearing on 7 April 2014 and 23 April 2014. Upon hearing the parties we reserved judgment. My learned brothers Mohamad Ariff Mohd Yusof JCA and Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim JCA have read the judgment and approved the same. This is our judgment.

Preliminaries

[2] At the outset we must say the learned judicial commissioner had dealt with the issues meticulously and written a comprehensive judgment. The complaint b

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