|
|
|
|
|
Lawyerment Quick Link - Homepage - Free Email - Message Boards - LawCrawler - Legal News - Legal Dictionary - Lawyers Jokes - Lawyers Directory - Newsletters - Legal Guide - Refer A Friend - Interesting Facts - Library - Downloads - >> more
| Library Search | ||||||
|
||||||
| Legal Subjects > Law of Malaysia > Case & Codes > Judgments | ||||||
Main Category Related Category
Related Topics
6th Defendant The claim by the plaintiffs against the 6th defendant is for negligence and nuisance. Though this defendant did not enter appearance the plaintiffs did not obtain interlocutory judgment against it. For this, this Court has to consider whether the plaintiffs' claim against this defendant is sustainable. Analysis There is no necessity for me to recount the facts concerning this defendant since it has been disclosed during the analysis on the liability of the other defendants, particularly that of the 5th defendant. Judging by those facts I do not find that this defendant is negligent or committed nuisance. There is no evidence advanced to link the acts of this defendant in excavating and clearing the Arab Malaysian Land to the cause of the landslide that tumbled Block 1. The acts of this defendant did bring about floods to the car parks of the Highland Towers, of which the 5th defendant should have investigated and if it did would have discovered the hazard on the slope, but Tropic did not cause the Highland Towers tragedy nor the damage to the plaintiffs. For this reason, I find that the 6th defendant is not liable for the claim against it.
| ||||||
