MTR FREIGHT SDN BHD vs J& T EXPRESS (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Petitioner Advocates:James Ng Kean Yip,Tay Yeong Hui ,Respondent Advocate: Leong Chee Weng,M Naveen Sri Kantha,Harshinie paranitharan

Table of Content
1. procedural background: application to strike out due to non-compliance with peremptory discovery orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. the court's power under o 24 r 16 of the rules of court 2012 to strike out for non-compliance. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. non-compliance with a peremptory discovery order justifies automatic sanctions. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. material prejudice caused to the defendant by the plaintiff's failure to discover central documents. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
5. possession of documents is not a defense if the discovery order is specific and non-compliant. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
6. arguments on document possession are barred by res judicata after discovery order perfection. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
7. repeated non-compliance with court orders constitutes contumelious conduct requiring sanction. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75)
8. striking out is an appropriate sanction for breach of peremptory orders. (Para 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81