1/50
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
---|
No study sessions yet.
Amend pleadings before close of pleadings
o20r3 - allowed once
o20r4 - other party may object within 14 days
Amend pleadings after close of pleadings
o20r5 - need to apply for leave of court - under this order - court has discretion to allow amendment at any stage of the proceeding
principles in respect of application to amend
[Yamaha Motor]
whether the application is bona fide in nature
will it cause any prejudice to the other party?
will it change the character of the suit?
[Hong Leong Finance v Low]
[Yamaha] is insufficient to deal to application to amend made on the eve of a trial - was decided before pre-trial case management was introduced
pre-trial case management intends to ensure just, expeditious and economic disposal of an action
Thus, when application made at the very last stage - Yamaha should not be the sole consideration as:
order for compensation by payment of costs may not be adequate remedy and
it will disrupt the administration of justice
test in [Hong Leong Finance v Low]
applicant could provide cogent and reasonable explanation as to lateness
application not a tactical maneuver
proposed amendment discloses full particulars for the court to ascertain prospects of success
lateness can be compensated by payment of costs
Amendment may not be allowed after close of pleadings if
to withdraw admission unless the admission was made mistakenly or inadvertently [Hollis v Burton]
Eg: if P made the admission in the SOC - SOC prepared by solicitor - indicates due legal service - mostly reject
to raise a coa which accrued after action commenced [Sio Koon Lin SB Mehra]
after expiry of LP
Amendment of pleadings to add new party post LP
power of amendment under o20r5 does not extend to amendment of adding a new D after expiry of LP
[Instantcolor v Inkmaker] - doctrine of relation back does not apply to amendment to join appellant as co-D
if appellant added as co-D, takes effect on the date of court order adding it as a party
doctrine of relation back
the amendment relates back to the date of the original writ and SOC it amends - takes effect retrospectively - on the date the original writ or pleading was issued, not on the date of amendment
Amendment before close of pleadings
o20r1 - amendment of WRIT before service of writ - may amend as of right once
o20r1(3) - need to apply for leave of court if seek to
alter capacity of parties
add new parties
add a new coa
amend SOC
o20r3 - amendment of PLEADINGS - may amend once
via NOA + affidavit
Issue not raised in pleadings
o18r10 - parties are bound by their pleadings - issues not raised in pleadings cannot be relied on by the parties in the trial to prevent element of surprise - [Janagi v Ong]
Matters which must be specifically pleaded
o18r8
performance
release
fraud
limitation in any relevant statute
fact showing illegality which would make any claim or defense unmaintainable
Pleading of Limitation Period
[Tasja v Golden Approach] - where period of limitation is absolute - the LP expressly stated in specific provision - PAPA1948 - need not be specifically pleaded
[Letchumanan v Secure Plantation]
fraud is a generic term that covers all manner of cheat, deceit and dishonesty
forgery is a specific method of fraud
complaint of forgery = complaint of fraud
circumstance where crt would allow party to rely on issue not raised in pleadings
[Iftikar Ahmed Khan v Perwira Affin Bank] - where the matter or material facts are not pleaded but evidence is led without objection - crt is bound to consider such evidence although it amounts to a departure under o18r10 if the opposite party is not taken by surprise, prejudiced embarrassed or misled
Why?
it has the effect of curing defect in the pleading
Unless
the evidence represents a radical departure from the pleading - is not just a variation or modification of what has been alleged in the pleading
Can a point not raised in pleading be raised in appeal?
[Lee Ah Chor v Southern Bank] - issues not raised in pleading cannot be raised in appeal
Exception to Lee Ah Chor
[Yong Mok Hin v United Malay States Sugar Industries] -
can raise point of law if
it raised a question of jurisdiction
would result in rectification of an erroneous order
[Luggage Distributor v Tan]
The factors for and against the admission of the new point must be weighed on a balance in the interest of justice
Pleadings should contain facts only not evidence or law
o18r7 - every pleading must contain - statement of material facts on which the parties rely on but not evidence by which those facts are to be proved
court has discretion to decide what law is applicable
Material facts
[Bruce v Odhams Press] - those necessary to formulate a complete cause of action
distinguish between pleading law VS raising a point of law
o18r11 - raising a point of law is allowed
[Middlesex County Council v Nathan]
if a statute is relied on as the foundation of a claim or defense - the facts necessary to bring the case within the statute must be pleaded
require P to furnish more particulars
o18r12 (3) - D may apply to crt and crt may order a party to serve particulars to any claim as the crt thinks just
before applying - o18r12(6) - D should have sent a letter to P requesting for the particulars - the request must be particular and precise - shall give P some time to furnish the particulars requested
If P failed to respond to the request - P can apply for order by way of NOA + affidavit stating that he has made request by way of letter and P failed to respond
If such letter is not sent - crt may refuse to make order unless crt opined that there were sufficient reasons for the letter not being sent
What would the court look into when deciding whether to grant order under o18r12(3)?
whether P has actually given sufficient particulars in the pleadings
Can the other party refuse to furnish the particulars required?
Yes if:
a delay tactic
irrelevant
evidence is required
If application of order made before D served his defense
o18r12(5) - crt may refuse to make such order unless the court thinks it is necessary and desirable to enable the D to mount his defense
Function of particulars
[DS Dr Ling v Krishna] -
to inform the other party of the nature of the claim
to prevent the other party from being taken by surprise
enable the other side to know the evidence they ought to prepare for the trial
limit generality of pleadings or evidence
limit and define the issues to be tried
to restrain the parties from going into matters not raised
Situation where parties could apply to strike out pleadings
o18r19 - at any stage before judgment
even so - prudent to apply promptly, preferably before close of pleadings or it might be seen as a delay tactic
Apply via NOA + affidavit on the basis of any of the 4 grounds under o18r19(a)-(d)
can only strike out part of the pleading
[Bandar Builders v United Malayan Banking]
only in plain and obvious case - recourse shall only be had if the claim, on the face of it ‘obviously unsustainable’
if only to strike out part of the pleading - can argue lower threshold under Bandar Builders - need not be plain and obvious case
no reasonable cause of action or defense
Eg: if party absolves his right to litigation by accepting an offer to settlement
(b) scandalous, frivolous or vexatious
© prejudice, embarrass or delay the trial
(d) abuse of court process
issue of res judicata
[Syarikat Sebati v Pengarah Jabatan Perhutanan]
the decision was judicial
judgment was in fact pronounced
decision was final and on the merits
earlier litigation determined the same question as that raised in the later liti
parties to the later liti were either parties to the earlier liti or their privy or earlier decision was in rem
bare denial of defense
wrong party sued
[Pertama v Kartika] - derogatory statement wholly unnecessary and irrelevant - ought to be struck out
Purpose of fiiling MOA and defense
to inform the P that the D intends to appear before court and dispute the matter
Mode of entering appearance
o12
OS action
o12r12 - no appearance required
Writ action
o12r1 - by solicitor or in person - in Form 11 - send a copy to P or solicitor
o12r1(2) - company must enter appearance by solicitor
o77r4 - partnership - sued in the name of firm- must enter appearance by the partners’ name - cannot enter in the name of firm - but action continues in the name of firm
o76r3(6) - person under disability - enter by a litigation rep and represented by a solicitor
Can appearance be entered after time limit
o12r5 - if JID has been entered by adverse party - no need leave of court but must only enter defense unless the court orders - if JID entered - need to apply for leave of court
non-compliance
o1A and o2r3
crt and judge shall have regard to the overriding interest of justice and not only the technical non-compliance of rules unless it has occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice - which cannot be cured either by amendment or compensation by costs
if D failed to enter appearance within time limit
o13r1 - P entitled to obtain JIDA against D
type of judgment P is able to pray got when entering JID
Final judgment
o13r1 - liquidated damages
JID will crystalize in final judgment if D does not apply to set aside within 30 days
Interlocutory judgment
o13r2 - unliquidated damages
o13r3 - movable property
o13r4 - possession of immovable property
cannot enforce judgment unless R has assessed the damages and given an allocator
o13r5 - mixed claims
mixed claims
there will be ONE judgment in default of appearance to which P will enter both final and interlocutory judgment
Procedure to enter JIDA
JIDA can be entered as of right - without the need to make any formal application
file docs in compliance with o13r7
Certificate of non-appearance in Form 12 - o13r7
affidavit of service in Form 135 - o62r9
JID of appearance in Form 75 - o42r5
cannot enter JID against D if D is represented by solicitor and P did not give notice of intention to enter JID at least 7 days before the date of hearing -r56 LPPER 1978
JID cannot be entered in claim for
o13r6 - equitable relief
has to file an affidavit or service (o62r9) and proceed as if D entered appearance
wait for D to enter defense within 14 days after time limited to enter appearance - o18r2
if D x enter defense - can apply via NOA + affidavit to court for JID in defense under o19r7
not mere technical non-compliance but fundamental defect - not curable under o1A or o2r3
Procedure to enter JIDD
o19r7 - P prepare
original writ
affidavit of service - o62r9
Judgment in Form 75 - o42r5
P fix hearing date of JIDD with Registrar and serve notice on D informing hearing date
cannot enter JID against D if D is represented by solicitor and P did not give notice of intention to enter JID at least 7 days before the date of hearing -r56 LPPER 1978
on the day of hearing - Registrar will make JIDD
[Lam Kong v Thong Guan]
JIDA for equitable relief can be set aside
time limit to enter appearance
o12r4 - 14 days
when there is more than one D
o13r4(2) - cannot enforce JID on one party only
if P claim for damages and equitable relief
o13r6 applicable - JID entered is irregular - o13r1 -r5 only apply if the claim is for damages only - wherein P can then enter judgment for damages to be assessed if interlocutory
Assessment of damages
o37 r1
P apply to Registrar by NOA for directions as to how the assessment proceedings will be conducted within 1 month from the date of JID
on the hearing of application of direction - R will give directions as to how the assessment proceedings will be conducted (oral testimony or by affidavit)
P file notice of appointment for assessment for damages in Form 62A and serve the notice on D within 14 days thereafter
Registrar will hear evidence from both parties and determine the appropriate quantum that best administers justice and certify the amount
Power to set aside JIDA or JIDD
o13r8 - JIDA
o19r9 - JIDD
if the JID is irregular
time limit to set aside JID
o42r6 - within 30 days after receipt of JID by D
Procedure to set aside
apply via NOA + affidavit stating the grounds to which D is relying to set aside
principles governing whether or not crt should set aside JID
General Rule : [Evans v Bartlam] - any judgment given in default - meaning not hearing on merits of the case is always liable to be set aside - affirmed in [Hasil Bumi Perumahan v United Malayan Banking]
to set aside a regular JID
D can only set aside if he can show merits in his defense - there is triable issue
to set aside an irregular JID
P has breached rules of court or court order
can be set aside as of right regardless of merit in defense