JUDGMENT

Abdul Rahman Sebli CJSS:

[1] There were two appeals before us. Appeal No 02(f)-14-05/2024(W) was an appeal by the appellant ("Public Bank") against the decision of the Court of Appeal allowing the respondents' appeal on liability whereas Appeal No 02(f)-15-05/2024(W) was an appeal by the respondents against the Court of Appeal's decision awarding them only nominal damages of RM10,000.00 despite having proved liability against Public Bank. They had claimed RM60 million for general damages, RM250 million for aggravated damages and RM250 million for exemplary damages, totalling RM560 million.

[2] In reversing the decision of the High Court on liability, the Court of Appeal found Public Bank to be in breach of an implied term of contract imposing a duty of confidentiality not to disclose the respondents' banking information. As for the reason why the Court of Appeal awarded only nominal damages of RM10,000.00 to the respondents despite having found liability to have been proved against Public Bank, it was because the respondents were found to have failed to prove their loss. The learned judge of the High Court who tried the case at the first instance even suggested a token sum of RM15.00 (Fifteen Ringgit) as nominal damages had she allowed the respondents' claim, which she did not.