kerugian ekonomi Flashcards

Question

Murphy v Brentwood District Council (page 150(

Answer 1

Memansuhkan keputusan kes Anns v Merton London Borough Council

Answer 2

Sehingga akhir tahun 1990an, mengikut perkembangan di England

Answer 3

-Wan Mohamed J. : Kerugian yg dialami oleh plaintif adalah kerugian ekonomi tulen, dan defendan ketiga tidak boleh dikenakan tanggungan di bawah tort bagi kerugian yg dialami oleh plaintif dlm kes ini kerana tiada sesiap pun yg cedera atau tiada harta kepunyaan orang lain rosak akibat drp perbuatan atau salahlaku defendan ketiga. Keputusan yg dibuat oleh Dewan Pertuanan (HOL) dlm kes MURPHY dan lain-lain kes lagi yg membuat keputusan yg sama, adalah sangat munasabah, berpatutan dan sepatutnya diterima sehingga bila-bila masa pun.

Answer 4

- Teh Khem Ơn & ors & anor v Teoh & Wu Development SDN BHD (page 148) - Pilba Trading & Agency v South East Asia Insurance BHD & anor (page 152)

Answer 5

Tindakan dibawa oleh sekumpulan pembeli terhadap; i)Pemaju bagi kecacatan dalam pembinaan rumah yang dibeli oleh pembeli2 ii)Arkitek, jurutera dan majlis bandaran bagi ganti rugi kecuaian. Mahkamah Tinggi: i)Membenarkan tuntutan terhadap pemaju di bawah kontrak. ii)Menolak tuntutan bagi ganti rugi kecuaian terhadap pihak2 lain atas alasan ianya pure economic loss.

Answer 6

Dr. Abdul Hamid Abdul Rashid & Anor v Jurusan Malaysia Consultants & ors(page 149) - James Foong J. : Of all the reasons against allowing pure economic loss, the fundamental rational is still to prevent the creation of liability to ‘an indeterminate amount for an indeterminate time to an indeterminate class. But this can cause misconception and an unallied fear (alasan polisi)

Answer 7

Mahkamah Tinggi (James Foong J) : Membenarkan tuntutan utk krugian ekonomi tulen atas alasan yg sama dgn keputusannya dlm kes DR. ABDUL HAMID. Mahkamah Rayuan (Gopal Sri Ram JCA) : Tidak bersetuju dgn alasan yg diberikan oleh James Foong J. Soalan yg perlu ditanya ialah sama ada kerugian ekonomi tulen boleh diramal (dipralihat) secara munasabah oleh defendan? Mahkamah Rayuan juga memansuhkan keputusan kes DR. ABDUL HAMID & PILBA TRADING. - Dalam kes ini, walaupun Mahkamah Rayuan bersetuju bahawa pure economic loss boleh dituntut, namun ianya adalah atas prinsip undang-undang yg berbeza dari alasan yang diberikan oleh James Foong, J. iaitu atas alasan polisi. - Gopal Sri Ram: 1)Neighbourhood principle in Stevenson v Donoghue is applicable to claims for both physical damage and pure economic loss. 2)Pure economic loss is recoverable in negligence provided it is a reasonably foreseeable type of loss; and 3)Policy considerations play no part in negating or limiting the scope of the duty of care in negligence

Answer 8

- Salah satu pihak dalam kes Steven Phoa, iaitu MPAJ telah membuat rayuan ke Mahkamah Persekutuan terhadap keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan. - Federal Court held: 1)Pure economic loss is recoverable in negligence 2)COA was correct to hold that the critical question was not the nature of the damage itself, whether physical or pecuniary, but whether the scope of the duty of care in the circumstances of the case is such as to embrace damage of the kind which the P claimed to have sustained 3)When deciding the issue of liability for claims in negligence, be it physical or pure economic loss, the court has to determine whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care - Abdul Hamid Mohamad FCJ: that it was not fair, just and reasonable to impose such a burden on MPAJ or other local councils in similar situations for the economic loss suffered by the Plaintiff/Respondent

Answer 9

Mokhtar Sidin JCA : In our view, the learned judge was within his right to award damages on pure economic loss. We have been too long in the shadow of HOL’s decisions of MURPHY and D & F Estates. We are of the view that it is time for us to move out of that shadow and move along with other Commonwealth countries where damages could be awarded for pure economic loss.

kerugian ekonomi Flashcards

(33 cards)