JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] The primary question of law for disposal in this appeal relates to the recurrent problem of identifying when a court is rendered functus officio, as opposed to when it retains jurisdiction and/or remains empowered to grant consequential orders, subsequent to the grant of a final judgment or order.
[2] However, overlying the issue stated above in this appeal, is that of res judicata and issue estoppel, as the present appeal stems from an impeachment suit seeking to set aside orders granted in an earlier suit. This impeachment suit was filed after the grant of final orders in the earlier suit. All avenues of appeal in respect of the earlier suit had also been exhausted.
[3] The background facts are of significance.
The Broad Background
[4] The respondent, Engareh (M) Sdn Bhd ('Engareh') filed a suit founded on the tort of detinue against the appellant, Stone World Sdn Bhd ('Stone World') in S-22NCVC-85-2010 ('Suit No 85').
[5] After a full trial, Engareh succeeded in establishing its case in detinue. The trial court ordered that the subject matter of the claim, marble stones, be delivered up or that Engareh collected the same. Additionally the trial court ordered that damages were to be assessed in favour of Engareh, and Stone World in respect of its counterclaim.
[6] Stone World then sought an amendment or consequential order whereby the option to deliver or collect was altered such that Stone World was bound to deliver up the marble stones to a specific site within an allocated time. However Stone World did not comply with this order.
[7] Engareh, some four years later, sought a consequential order from the trial court for damages to be assessed rather than for the delivery up of the marble stones, as the marble stones had been effectively ravaged/damaged by time and the environment.