On 10.07.2025, our Court of Appeal (comprising Honourable Justices Datuk Ravinthran A/L Paramaguru, Dato’ Dr. Choo Kah Sing, and Dato’ Ahmad Fairuz Bin Zainol Abidin) unanimously set aside a Summary Judgment previously obtained by a banking institution against our Client, an established businessman.
Background
Jonathan Khaw, assisted by Ern Chee, continued to act as counsel for our Client, following Summary Judgment granted against him at the Sessions Court and affirmed by the Kuala Lumpur High Court. Our mandate was to ensure that our Client’s fundamental right to fully argue his case in Court was upheld, leading to a successful appeal before the Court of Appeal this morning.
Understanding ‘Triable Issues’
The Court of Appeal reaffirmed an important principle under Order 14 of the Rules of Court 2012 -that the threshold for establishing ‘triable issues’ is notably low. A Summary Judgment is designed only for clear, straightforward cases where there are no arguable defence or genuine questions of law and/or fact.
Key Points from our Court of Appeal’s Decision
- Threshold for Triable Issues.The Court of Appeal emphasized that if a party raises any plausible and/or legitimate questions of fact and/or law, this constitutes sufficient grounds for a full trial.
- Procedural Justice. Summary Judgments must not deprive parties of their rightful opportunity to present and argue their case thoroughly in Court.
- Necessity for a Comprehensive Trial. Complex disputes, especially those involving serious legal and/or factual intricacies, often require thorough judicial examination of evidence and arguments, making them totally unsuitable for Summary Judgment.
Importance of This Decision
This Appellate decision highlights that not all banking disputes are straightforward cases of unpaid debts. Some disputes, like our Client’s, involve genuine complexities and substantial legal and factual questions. Such cases merit careful and comprehensive judicial consideration, emphasizing the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that all litigants have their cases thoroughly and fairly heard through a full trial.
Conclusion:
Our success in this appeal reaffirms the importance of vigilant advocacy in cases involving sophisticated banking institutions. Ensuring the proper application of legal principles such as the threshold for ‘triable issues’ not only safeguards our Clients’ interests but also contributes meaningfully to the integrity and fairness of our judicial system.
*Note: This article is provided solely for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. *Datoban