Semporna lawyer Ainal ordered to pay RM320,000 damages, costs to Shafie
KOTA KINABALU: A Semporna lawyer was ordered by the High Court here to pay RM320,000 in damages and costs to plaintiff, Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal, after ruling in favour of the plaintiff’s suit.
Judicial Commissioner, Celestina Stuel Galid, made the ruling yesterday and awarded Datuk Mohd Shafie the amount after assessing the damages claim in his suit against defendant Datuk Ainal Fattah for malicious prosecution through publication in the media of his (Ainal’s)� application to bar the Parti Warisan Sabah president from contesting or voting in the 14th general election.
The court ordered Ainal to pay damages to the plaintiff a global sum of RM300,000 with statutory interest of 5 percent per annum from yesterday until the date of full settlement, and costs of RM20,000.
The judge held that the defendant, Ainal, did not apply to aside the judgement in default against the claims made by the plaintiff and thus assumed that the claims had been proven.
In Shafie’s suit filed on April 24, he claimed that Ainal, either personally or through his counsel, had made public his application, highlighting alleged corruption in leading newspapers with intent to cause maximum damage to his (Shafie’s)� reputation as a wellrespected politician.
Further, the publication of the unverified allegations in the defendant’s statement to the media was in breach of Rule 50A of the Advocates (Practice and Etiquette)� Rules 1988, which provides that copies of documents filed in court are not to be furnished to the press for publication before the hearing of the matter in open court.
The conduct of the defendant as outlined shows that he had acted deliberately to cause harm and damage to the plaintiff even though his application is unsustainable, frivolous and vexatious, besides being an abuse of the process of the court.
The writ was issued by Messrs Lind Willie Wong and Chin, as Advocates and Solicitors for the plaintiff.
Moreover, the malicious and ill intent of the defendant was also shown when, at the hearing on 19th April 2018 before the High Court Judge, the defendant’s counsel had refused to accept earlier dates proposed by the Judge.
The defendant, however, agreed to accept the later date of 7th May 2018 even though by that date, the defendant’s application would have been rendered redundant or academic as had been highlighted by the Judge during the hearing.
The malicious and ill intent of the defendant was further evident by the defendant having filed his application without any affidavit verifying the alleged corrupt practices against the plaintiff as stated in his statement as a mandatory requirement under Order 53 Rule 3(2)� of the Rules of Court 2012.
The suit also said that Datuk Mohd Shafie’s reputation had been harmed and seriously damaged and that he was also put to inconvenience and anxiety and has suffered loss and damages.
Shafie was claiming general damages, exemplary and aggravated damages, interests, and costs as well as other reliefs as the court may deem fit.
Meanwhile outside the courtroom, counsel Datuk Douglas Lind, when asked for a summary on the judge’s decision, opined that the judge had held that the defendant did not file his defence against the statement of claim by the plaintiff, which proved the claim of malicious prosecution.
He said that Ainal had filed the judicial review against his client not to get justice or relief but more on ulterior motives for political reasons to damage Datuk Mohd Shafie’s reputation before the election.
Counsel Nurul Rafeeqa Afdul Mutolip represented Ainal.