Why did the Court of Appeal order Tajuddin to pay RM120,000 in costs?

Question

Accepted Answer

Court of Appeal Orders Tajuddin to Pay RM120,000 in Costs Due to Departure from General Practice on Awarding Costs

The Court of Appeal mandated that former Pasir Salak MP Datuk Seri Tajuddin Abdul Rahman pay a total of RM120,000 in costs to former Shah Alam MP Khalid Abd Samad and KiniTV Sdn Bhd. This decision arose after Khalid and KiniTV were granted leave to appeal the High Court's prior ruling which had dismissed Tajuddin's defamation lawsuit without awarding costs to the defendants. The appellate court found that the High Court judge had deviated from the established practice of awarding costs to a successful defendant, particularly when significant legal work had been undertaken.
High Court's Decision to Deny Costs Was Set Aside

A three-member bench of the Court of Appeal unanimously ordered Tajuddin to pay RM60,000 in costs to Khalid and another RM60,000 to KiniTV. This decision effectively overturned the High Court's earlier stance of not awarding costs to the defendants after they successfully defended themselves against Tajuddin's defamation claims. The total sum ordered encompasses the costs incurred during the High Court trial, the process of obtaining leave to appeal at the Court of Appeal, and the proceedings of the day the judgment was delivered.
Departure from General Practice on Costs

The Court of Appeal highlighted that the lower court judge had departed from the general practice by not awarding costs to Khalid and KiniTV, who had prevailed in defending the defamation suit. Justice S. Nantha Balan noted that this decision was made unilaterally by the judge without affording the parties an opportunity to present their submissions on the matter of costs. The judge had cited the case as being a matter of public interest as the sole justification for not awarding costs.
Questioning the Public Interest Classification

The appellate court expressed reservations about classifying the case as a public interest matter solely because both litigants were Members of Parliament and a media statement was issued in the Parliament lobby. The Court of Appeal questioned whether these factors alone were sufficient to warrant setting aside the general rule for awarding costs. Khalid and KiniTV were deemed entitled to costs due to the substantial amount of legal work involved, given that Tajuddin's suit was filed in February 2017 and the trial spanned from 2019 to 2021.
Background of the Defamation Suit

Tajuddin had initiated the defamation lawsuit against Khalid and KiniTV on April 26, 2017. He alleged that Khalid uttered defamatory statements and used curse words against him during two media conferences held at the Parliament Lobby on November 21 and 24, 2016. Tajuddin contended that these statements implied he was unfit to serve as an MP and acted contrary to Islamic teachings and culture. The High Court had initially dismissed Tajuddin's suit against Khalid, KiniTV, and NSTP on February 22, 2022, without awarding any costs.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Why did the Court of Appeal order Tajuddin to pay RM120,000 in costs?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends