Court of Appeal Increases General Damages for Former Bank Officer
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has awarded an additional RM300,000 in general damages to a former bank officer, Lim Hui Jin, for tort of misfeasance in public office and breach of statutory duty by a police inspector.
Increased Damages Justified
In allowing Lim’s cross-appeal to raise the quantum from RM200,000, Justice Wong Kian Kheong said K Sopawan had unlawfully frozen Lim’s four bank accounts for four years. Lim had to incur legal costs and sustain his livelihood by obtaining a loan and selling a joint property held under the name of a family member.
"We are of the considered view that RM500,000 should be a just and adequate amount of general damages for the plaintiff (Lim) in this case," said Justice Wong in the broad grounds delivered yesterday.
Vicarious Liability and Exemplary Damages
Wong said the two defendants named in the suit – the inspector-general of police and the government – are vicariously liable for Sopawan’s conduct. "There is no dispute that Sopawan’s torts had been ‘oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional’, which also justified an award of exemplary damages," he said.
High Court Awards and Appeal
The High Court awarded Lim RM200,000 in general damages two years ago, which has now been increased to RM500,000. However, the Court of Appeal maintained the award for exemplary damages at RM100,000. It also reduced the RM75,000 costs awarded to Lim at the High Court to RM50,000.
Setting Aside Liability and Unnamed Public Servant
The bench also allowed the government’s appeal to set aside the High Court’s finding of liability against an unnamed deputy public prosecutor and another police inspector, Noorariff Shah Zainuddin. Wong said the bench was bound by a Federal Court ruling that an unnamed public servant could not be held liable. He said Noorariff also could not be held liable as he was only responsible for investigating a criminal breach of trust report lodged against Lim’s mother, Tan Hoo Eng, a director of an Ipoh-based company.
Background of the Case
The facts of the case revealed that Tan’s business partner lodged a police report against her on April 7, 2014 for alleged criminal breach of trust. No report was made against Lim, who was then employed in Kuala Lumpur. The police froze Tan’s bank accounts and seized her money under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (Amla). She was also charged with CBT in the Ipoh sessions court. Early this year, the High Court quashed all the CBT and anti-money laundering charges against Tan on grounds that her constitutional rights to a fair investigation and trial were violated.
Freezing Orders and Release of Funds
However, Sopawan issued freezing orders on Lim’s four bank accounts with CIMB on June 24, 2014. On September 11, 2014, the DPP ordered one of the accounts to be seized, but Lim was not charged with any offence. In his statement of claim, Lim said he had made several applications to release the money from the account as he was neither prosecuted nor was his money forfeited. Wong said money in one of Lim’s accounts was only released to him on August 17, 2018.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Court of Appeal has increased the general damages to be paid to Lim Hui Jin from RM200,000 to RM500,000, citing the just and reasonable nature of the award. The court has also maintained the award for exemplary damages at RM100,000 and reduced the costs awarded to Lim at the High Court to RM50,000.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the new amount of general damages awarded to Lim Hui Jin?
A: RM500,000
Q: What is the current award for exemplary damages?
A: RM100,000
Q: What is the new amount of costs awarded to Lim Hui Jin?
A: RM50,000
Q: Who are the two defendants named in the suit?
A: The inspector-general of police and the government