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

2025 MarsdenLR 3637

HIGH COURT MALAYA IPOH
MERU VALLEY RESORT BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
HU WEN SHION & ANOR – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Gary Abraham Xavier ,Respondent Advocate: Norleena Jamal

Table of Content
1. background facts of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. procedural requirements in defamation claims (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
3. essential elements and their connection in counterclaims (Para 15 , 18 , 19)
4. binding nature of higher court decisions (Para 26 , 29 , 31)
5. conclusion on counterclaims and maintenance charges (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
Moses Susayan JC:

Introduction

[1] The appellant's appeal arises from the Sessions Court's dismissal of its application to determine three legal questions under O 33 rr 2 and 5 of the Rules of Court 2012. Following the filing of the appeal, the respondents raised preliminary objections, asserting that the appeal was incompetent and non-appealable under s 28(1)(a) and (c) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA). The appellant, however, argued that the case involves legal questions, falling within the exception of s 28(1)(a). After reviewing the preliminary objections, I concluded that the substantial appeal indeed raises questions of law and therefore qualifies as an exception under s 28(1)(a) of the CJA, making the appeal valid and competent. I dismissed the preliminary objections with costs in the cause and allowed the appeal to pro

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