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

2025 MarsdenLR 3255

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
PUNESHA SANKAR – Appellant
Versus
RAMSAY SIME DARBY HEALTH CARE SDN BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Manmohan S Dhillon,Luqman Firdaus ,Respondent Advocate: T Tharumarajah,Wong Ik Ling

Table of Content
1. real danger of bias assessment for recusal (Para 2 , 3)
2. defendants deny evidence of bias (Para 5 , 6)
3. legal test for bias involves real danger (Para 7 , 8 , 12)
4. perception of bias requires substantial proof (Para 9 , 11 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. precedent against judge shopping established (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
6. application for recusal dismissed with costs (Para 21)
Roz Mawar Rozain J:

[1] This is the Court's ruling on the Plaintiffs application (Encl 99) to recuse me from continuing to hear this matter.

[2] The Plaintiffs application is premised on the contention that there exists a real danger of bias, as I had previously undergone annual health screenings at the 3rd Defendant's hospital (Pantai Medical Centre Kuala Lumpur) specifically at the Health Screening Centre located in the Main Block, where the 4th Defendant (Dr Sanjiv Joshi Hari Chand) was one of the many doctors on duty on the day. The 4th Defendant was limited to interpreting the stress test results.

This Application

[3] The Plaintiff submitted that this circumstance creates an awkwardness, warranting my recusal. The authorities cited by the Plaintiff carry very distinguishing features namely the Federal Co

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