Ocbc Bank (Malaysia) Berhad v Yong Hong Development Sdn. Bhd. (JA-22NCVC-17-01/2016)

The 14th Defendant filed this appeal against “sebahagian keputusan dan/atau direktif yang mengekalkan arahan pemfailan Hujan Bertulis (selepas bicara) bagi pelupusan Writ (Kandungan 1) walaupun terdapat permohonan interlokutari Candics Lui Sze Yia yang belum dilupuskan, iaitu permohonan Defendant Ke-14 untuk membatalkan tuntutan Plaintiff menurut Aturan 33 Kaedah 2 dan 5 (Kandungan 949).

All parties have completed presenting their evidence in this trial. Consequently, during the last case management date, I issued directions for all the parties to submit their written submissions by 30.12.2024.

The 14th Defendant filed an application under Order 33 rule (2) and (5) on 06.12.2024 together with a certificate of urgency.

On 11.12.2024 the 14th Defendant wrote to this Court requesting for a postponement of the date fixed for the filing of written submissions. S/N ii3F2Ndx60qZ0dft0rrCg **Note : Serial number will be used to verify the originality of this document via eFILING portal 3

The grounds for seeking a postponement of the date for filing written submission are (reproduced verbatim) as follows: “4. Dengan ini, pihak kami memohon budi bicara Mahkamah untuk melapangkan dan/atau menangguhkan pemfailan dan pendengaran hujahan selepas bicara tersebut sehingga pelupusan Notis Permohonan defendan Ke-14.

Hal ini demikian kerana sifat tuntutan Notis Permohonan Defendan ke-14 adalah di bawah Aturan 33 kaedah 2 & 5 dan Aturan 92 kaedah 4 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, di mana bertujuan untuk melupuskan sebarang persoalan atau isu yang timbulan dalam tindakan ini terhadap Defendan Ke-14.

Berdasarkan sifat tuntutan surat permohonan di bawah Aturan 33 Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012, sekiranya Yang Arif dapat melupuskan Notis Permohonan Defendan Ke-14, dalam suatu keputusan yang memihak Defendan Ke-14, tuntutan Plaintif terhadap Defendan Ke-14 akan tidak lagi berwujud dan/atau berhenti.

Walau bagaimanapun, sekiranya Hujahan Selepas bicara (Post-Trial Preliminary Submissions) atau mana-mana permohonan dilupuskan sebelum permohonan Defendan Ke-14 dilupuskan dahulu, permohonan Defendan Ke-14 akan menjadi akademik dan/atau nugatori. S/N ii3F2Ndx60qZ0dft0rrCg [6] After considering the request for a postponement of the written submission deadline, I have disallowed the request for the following reasons:

The Writ was file in the year 2016 and this trial has been ongoing in for over 7 years.

There has been an undue and inexcusable delay on the part of the 14th Defendant in filing this application, which was submitted more than 6 years after the close of pleadings. The application was filed at the last minute, just after all parties had completed presenting their evidence.

I find there are no valid or justifiable grounds to postpone the filing of written submissions particularly since this trial has taken much longer than it should and the disposal of this case should not be delayed any further. S/N ii3F2Ndx60qZ0dft0rrCg [7] Thus, I see no valid reasons to delay the date of submission as the disposal of the application in Enclosure 949 could be completed before or simultaneously with the decision in Enclosure 1. Dated 6 February 2025 ……………t.t………………. Ahmad Murad Bin Abdul Aziz Judge High Court of Malaya Kuala Lumpur COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: G C TAN SOLICITORS FOR THE APPLICANT: TETUAN SHOOK LIN & BOK COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT: MUHAMMAD AIMAN SYAHMI & TEH SUKI SOLICITORS FOR THE DEFENDANT: TETUAN MANIAN K. MARAPPAN & CO Legislation Referred to: ➢ Rules of Court 2012 Decision date: 10 December 2024 S/N ii3F2Ndx60qZ0dft0rrCg