Lai Kok Ming v Mok Shiau Ping

Court of Appeal · · Civil Procedure

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This digest provides AI-generated summaries of recent Malaysian legal judgments and is provided for general informational purposes only. The digest may contain errors, omissions, or inaccuracies, and does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. For complete and authoritative information, always consult a qualified legal professional and refer to official court sources (here) or the full text of original judgments. The providers of this digest accept no responsibility or liability for any loss and/or damage resulting from reliance on its contents.

Lai Kok Ming v Mok Shiau Ping
CourtCourt of Appeal
Judgment Date10 April 2026
Date Uploaded29 April 2026
Legal TopicsCivil Procedure
Parties

Appellant(s): Lai Kok Ming

Respondent(s):

  • Mok Shiau Ping
  • Public Bank Berhad
Bench
  • YA Dato' Ahmad Kamal Bin Md. Shahid
  • YA Dato' Ahmad Fairuz bin Zainol Abidin
  • YA Dato' Ong Chee Kwan
Facts & Background
  • The appellant obtained a monetary judgment against the respondent in the Sessions Court in 2012.
  • No steps were taken to enforce the judgment within six years of the judgment date.
  • Over 11 years after the judgment, the appellant commenced garnishee proceedings to enforce the judgment without first obtaining leave from the Court.
Issues for the Court
  • Whether leave from the Court is required before a judgment creditor can commence garnishee proceedings to enforce a monetary judgment that was granted more than six years ago.
  • Whether garnishee proceedings under Order 49 of the Rules of Court 2012 are subject to the leave requirement under Order 46 for execution after six years have lapsed.
  • Whether the interpretation of "writ of execution" in Order 46 should be construed narrowly to exclude garnishee proceedings.
Decision
  • The Court held that leave of Court is required to commence garnishee proceedings if more than six years have lapsed since the date of the judgment or order.
  • The Court interpreted "writ of execution" in Order 46 broadly to include all modes of execution, including garnishee proceedings, to prevent the enforcement of stale judgments without court supervision.
  • The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Judicial Commissioner's decision that the garnishee proceedings were defective for failure to obtain prior leave.
Link to JudgmentView Full Judgment

Related judgments

📬 Found this useful?

Get daily AI-generated summaries of Malaysian legal judgments from the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal straight to your inbox, free!