Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Suffering a fibula bone fracture from an accident can be a painful and life-altering experience. If you're in Malaysia and pursuing a personal injury claim, one key question arises: Quantum for fracture fibula bone—what compensation can you expect? While every case is unique, Malaysian courts typically award general damages ranging from RM25,000 to RM40,000 for fibula fractures, depending on factors like fracture type and complications. This guide breaks down precedents, influencing factors, and practical insights to help you understand your potential claim.
Note: This is general information based on judicial precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
In Malaysian law, quantum refers to the monetary value of damages awarded in personal injury cases, primarily under heads like general damages for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities. Fibula fractures—often occurring alongside tibia injuries due to their location in the lower leg—are assessed based on medical evidence and past awards.
Courts rely on compendiums such as the Bar Council's Revised Compendium of Personal Injury Awards 2018 to guide decisions, adjusting for case specifics. No fixed amount exists; instead, awards reflect the injury's severity and impact. LIM SIL HAO vs SELVARAJAH PERUMAL - 2021 MarsdenLR 4
From analyzed cases, quanta generally fall between RM25,000 and RM40,000:
These awards highlight how closed fractures attract lower sums, while open, comminuted, or malunited ones with disabilities push quanta higher.
Courts evaluate several elements to determine the appropriate award:
While Malaysian precedents dominate, international cases (e.g., from India) provide context on fibula fracture claims in motor vehicle accidents:
These underscore global patterns: higher awards for open fractures with disability, often in accident claims under no-fault liability (e.g., Rs.25,000 baseline contested). Mukesh Kumar VS Rahul - 2011 Supreme(MP) 741
Awards aren't always straightforward:
To maximize your claim:1. Gather detailed medical reports on fracture type, treatment (e.g., nailing), and residuals.2. Reference compendiums and precedents like RM25,000 (closed) to RM40,000 (open comminuted). NOR AZNI ARSHAD @ ROSLAN LWN. AZRUL ALI - 2019 MarsdenLR 1036LIM SIL HAO vs SELVARAJAH PERUMAL - 2021 MarsdenLR 43. Argue against deductions for multi-injury cases by showing distinct impacts.4. Consider holistic effects like limp or earning loss, supported by evidence.
Legal professionals should cross-check against Bar Council guidelines and prepare for appeals on quantum adequacy.
Fibula fractures deserve fair compensation reflecting your suffering. Stay informed, document everything, and pursue justice effectively.
Word count: ~1050. Last updated based on available precedents.
#FibulaFracture #MalaysiaInjuryClaims #PersonalInjuryLaw
[27] I therefore find that the SCJ's award of RM30K for the fracture of one fibula bone is reasonable. It is not at all too low, as P submits. I affirm this award for RM30K. ... He testified that P suffered pain in the right knee due to the "closed fracture right midshaft fibula" and the "abrasion on the right knee", which does not tally with Dr Khaw's diagnosis of a "medial and lateral meniscus tear with mild joint effusion of the right knee and subchondral bone injury of the ... [2....
fibula, fracture of lateral condyle ® tibia; abulsion of femoral head of lateral collateral ligament of the neck of 5th metatarsal bone ®. ... Fracture of head of 4th metarsal bone ®. Chip fracture base of proximal phalanx ® 2nd toe, fracture base of proximal phalanx 3rd toe. ... He had fracture of fibula, tibia and fracture of metatarsal bone, etc. In this connection we also note that Ext.A6 disa....
In the present case, the claimant has suffered fracture of ulna bone in right hand and fibula bone in the left leg. For a Tailor, proper movement of hands and legs is necessary to run a tailoring machine. ... 2.In an accident which occurred on 03.11.2013, the 1st respondent/claimant sustained fracture of ulna bone in the right hand and fibula bone in the left leg and injuries on head and face. ... He has deposed that he perused the discharge summary....
fracture right distal third femur and fracture right femur RM40,000.00; (f) Right mid-shaft tibia and fibula closed fracture RM30,000.00; (g) Open wound right knee and multiple laceration RM4,500.00; (h) Traumatic right temporal intrarenchymal bleed, right temporal and frontal contusion ... , depression of skull bone right temporal region; and RM30,000.00; and (i) Expansion right temporal parietal haematoma and bone contusion RM45,000.00. ... On the other hand, the defendant appeals ag....
of tibia and fibula 4 cm shortening, bone loss muscle wasting etc. ... HMS telah mengakses kuantum seperti berikut:- (a) Open fracture right tibia and fibula dimana plaintif mengalami residual dan hilangupaya berikut iaitu bone loss 1cm, bone grafting, 4cm shortening, ankle and subtler shift are fixed at 10 degrees dan valgus angulations ... The tibia fracture showed some bone loss, therefore, it was shortened 1 cm. She was discharged on non-weight ....
of tibia and fibula 4 cm shortening, bone loss muscle wasting etc. ... HMS telah mengakses kuantum seperti berikut:- (a) Open fracture right tibia and fibula dimana plaintif mengalami residual dan hilangupaya berikut iaitu bone loss 1cm, bone grafting, 4cm shortening, ankle and subtler shift are fixed at 10 degrees dan valgus angulations (20 degrees). ... The tibia fracture showed some bone loss, therefore, it was shortened 1 cm. She was discharged o....
tibia fibula and 3rd proximal fibula: RM 38,000; (ii) right shoulder subluxation and fracture of humerus: RM 33,000; (iii) multiple scars: RM 4,000; (iv) laceration and bone expose: RM 4,000; and (v) abrasion: RM 3,000. ... [21] As for the fracture distal 1/3 right tibia fibula and 3rd proximal fibula, the Appellants have also attempted in their written submissions to dispute that the Respondent sustained ... facture to the proximal fibula as found ....
Therefore, the claimant’s case is to be categorized as permanent partial disability, but the fracture of tibia and fibula bone certainly not having percentage of permanent partial disability as 47%. In this regard, learned Commissioner exaggeratedly held the percentage of disability. ... The claimant is a driver by profession and had suffered fracture of left leg tibia and fibula bone. Therefore, certainly it cannot be said that the claimant had suffered 100% of permanent total disabil....
The Tribunal accepted the disability of 16% and it is a case of fracture of tibia and fibula, i.e., both bone fractures and the doctor has admitted that the fractures were united. ... The tibia is the main bone and fibula is the supporting bone and hence ought to have taken only 12% disability. 6 Hence, it requires interference of this Court. ... Having heard the respective learned counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record, this appeal is in respect of #H....
As a result, both of the claimants have sustained injuries and fracture of fibula and displaced fracture of patella and they took treatment as inpatients and have suffered permanent disability and ... Having taken note that fibula is a supporting bone to tibia, the Tribunal has not committed an error in taking 5% - 8 - disability and committed an error in considering ... He further submits that the claimant in MVC No.680/2013 had sustained undisplaced fracture of - 5 - patell....
Skin transplant surgery was done subsequently at the fractured side. After First aid, the claimant was shifted to Ganga Medical Centre, Kovai where he was treated as in-patient from 20.01.2011 to 31.01.2011. Surgery was conducted for the fracture of left tibia and fibula bone. Alleging that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the Bajaj Discover motorcyclist, the claim petition for Rs.10,00,000/- was filed against the owner of the motorcycle and its insurer.
The medical jurist further stated that, as per injury report (Ex.P.04), injury No.1 was found to be grievous in nature being caused by a sharp-edged weapon; whereas injury No.2 was simple in nature, as ascertained by the medical jurist. The fracture in the fibula bone of left leg was also found. Another wound was measuring 3 x 1 cm on the left thigh of Rakia Meena.
4. Type IIIC open fracture right tibia and fibula with bone loss and soft tissue loss.
A-6, wherein fracture in tibia fibula bone was reported. 5. X-ray was done by PW5 Dr. B.C. Ramola, Radiologist and he has also proved his x-ray report Ex.
It is submitted that the appellant sustained fracture of tibia and fibula bone. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant argued at length and submits that since the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, therefore, learned tribunal committed error in awarding only a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on account of no fault liability. It is submitted that the appellant was hospitalized at M.G. Cloth Market Hospital w.e.£.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
