THE PALACE OF JUSTICE CIVIL APPEAL NO. P-02-2074-2011 ...

tortfeasors (there is no allegation or finding of contributory negligence
on the part of the plaintiffs). Yet the reason as to why the liability
against the second and third defendants has to be only ‘50%’ is,
remarkably, not explained in the grounds of judgment. The reason as
to why the second and third defendants are found to be mere co-
tortfeasors is also, curiously, not explained in the grounds of
judgment. It is also not explained in the grounds of judgment that, if
the second and third defendants are mere co-tortfeasors, then who
is/are the other tortfeasor/tortfeasors who is/are also 50% liable? Is it
the developer (Merger Acceptance)? Or, is it the first defendant
(Rakyat Corporation)? Or, is there some other party? On this
question, the notes of evidence, the grounds of judgment and the
sealed Order, unfortunately, appear to be silent.
[Appeal allowed with costs of RM50,000 for here and below]
(DATO’ MOHD HISHAMUDIN YUNUS)
Judge, Court of Appeal
Palace of Justice
Putrajaya
44