GOLDEN STAR & ORS v. LING PEEK HOE & ANOR & ANOTHER APPEAL

[2024] 4 MLRA 345

GOLDEN STAR & ORS v. LING PEEK HOE & ANOR & ANOTHER APPEAL
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Mary Lim Thiam Suan, Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, Abu Bakar Jais FCJJ
[Civil Appeal Nos: 02(f)-60-10-2023(A) & 02(f)-61-10-2023(A)]
25 April 2024

JUDGMENT

Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJ:

[1] The parties in these appeals unfortunately have quite a long chequered litigation history between them spanning over 17 years - see decision of the Federal Court in Ling Peek Hoe & Anor v. Ding Siew Ching & Another Appeal [2017] 4 MLRA 372; [2017] 5 MLJ 385; [2017] 7 CLJ 641 (Federal Court). Ultimately, after succeeding in proving that the appellants had defrauded them into parting with their properties, the properties were returned to the respondents. Because the High Court had also ordered that damages be assessed by the Registrar, the parties were back before the High Court on that assessment of damages. These appeals arise from the damages that were assessed.

[2] A substantial part of the damages awarded comprised legal charges (RM2,918,000.00) that the respondents claimed they had incurred in the course of litigation between the parties. It is these legal charges that the appellants were discontent with and which form the substratum of these appeals; whether such charges may be recovered as special damages in the same proceedings between the same parties.

Order Of The High Court Dated 28 November 2012

[3] In order to fully appreciate the issue on the legal charges, we must go back to what the respondents' claim was about and the original order made on 28 November 2012. In a nutshell, the respondents claimed that the appellants had wrongfully conspired and combined amongst themselves to defraud and injure them in relation to two of their properties. After a full trial, the High Court allowed the respondents' claim and on 28 November 2012, declared the transfer of the two properties to the appellants invalid, null and void. That same order also ordered damages to be paid to the respondents. The relevant parts of the order read as follows:

ADALAH DIHAKIMI bahawa perjanjian-perjanjian jualbeli antara plaintif pertama dengan defendan ketiga, keempat dan/atau kelima untuk GM 3896 (dahulu EMR 2358) Lot 2563 dan GM 3895 (dahulu EMR 2359) Lot 2564 kedua-dua Mukim Sitiawan adalah diisytiharkan batal dan tidak sah.

Sign up to view full cases Login