Kerugian Ekonomi Tulen

Perbandingan di antara Pendekatan Mahkamah di England dengan Mahkamah di Malaysia

Translated title of the contribution: Pure economic loss: A comparison of court approaches in England and Malaysia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Pure economic loss claims do not receive favaourable treatment from courts. The courts are too cautious in allowing claims for pure economic loss. This may be due to various factors, such as, the difficulty in determining the amount of damages and there is also an apprehension that many people will take advantage by making fictitious claims. Adopting the content analysis methodology on the decided cases in England and Malaysia, the objective of this article is to analyse the decided cases in England and Malaysia pertaining to pure economic loss and thereafter compare the approach taken by the courts in both countries in the aspect of their willingness to allow claims for pure economic loss. Analysis of several relevant decided cases showed that the English courts had made some effort to reform their approach by allowing pure economic loss. However, subsequent decided cases showed that the courts in England still maintain their traditional approach by not allowing claims for pure economic loss. On the other hand, the development of cases in Malaysia in the1990s and early 2000 showed a significant development whereby the claims for pure economic loss in relation to defective buildings were allowed. Whether the courts in this country will allow claims for pure economic loss in other negligent cases, are yet to be ascertained. Nevertheless, this development shows the willingness of the Malaysian courts to create its own common law principles.

Original languageMalay
JournalJurnal Pengurusan
Volume51
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2017

Fingerprint

Malaysia
Economic loss
England
Willingness
Content analysis
Damage
Factors
Common law
Methodology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Accounting
  • Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Cite this

@article{06179636b09c482f95824e0e245debe0,
title = "Kerugian Ekonomi Tulen: Perbandingan di antara Pendekatan Mahkamah di England dengan Mahkamah di Malaysia",
abstract = "Pure economic loss claims do not receive favaourable treatment from courts. The courts are too cautious in allowing claims for pure economic loss. This may be due to various factors, such as, the difficulty in determining the amount of damages and there is also an apprehension that many people will take advantage by making fictitious claims. Adopting the content analysis methodology on the decided cases in England and Malaysia, the objective of this article is to analyse the decided cases in England and Malaysia pertaining to pure economic loss and thereafter compare the approach taken by the courts in both countries in the aspect of their willingness to allow claims for pure economic loss. Analysis of several relevant decided cases showed that the English courts had made some effort to reform their approach by allowing pure economic loss. However, subsequent decided cases showed that the courts in England still maintain their traditional approach by not allowing claims for pure economic loss. On the other hand, the development of cases in Malaysia in the1990s and early 2000 showed a significant development whereby the claims for pure economic loss in relation to defective buildings were allowed. Whether the courts in this country will allow claims for pure economic loss in other negligent cases, are yet to be ascertained. Nevertheless, this development shows the willingness of the Malaysian courts to create its own common law principles.",
keywords = "Defective building, England, Malaysia, Negligence, Pure economic loss",
author = "Rahmah Ismail and {Mohamed Fadzil}, Rozlinda and {Shaik Ahmad Yusoff}, Sakina and {Mohamed Isa}, Suzanna and Halim, {Affaf Abd}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "Malay",
volume = "51",
journal = "Jurnal Pengurusan",
issn = "0127-2713",
publisher = "Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Kerugian Ekonomi Tulen

T2 - Perbandingan di antara Pendekatan Mahkamah di England dengan Mahkamah di Malaysia

AU - Ismail, Rahmah

AU - Mohamed Fadzil, Rozlinda

AU - Shaik Ahmad Yusoff, Sakina

AU - Mohamed Isa, Suzanna

AU - Halim, Affaf Abd

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Pure economic loss claims do not receive favaourable treatment from courts. The courts are too cautious in allowing claims for pure economic loss. This may be due to various factors, such as, the difficulty in determining the amount of damages and there is also an apprehension that many people will take advantage by making fictitious claims. Adopting the content analysis methodology on the decided cases in England and Malaysia, the objective of this article is to analyse the decided cases in England and Malaysia pertaining to pure economic loss and thereafter compare the approach taken by the courts in both countries in the aspect of their willingness to allow claims for pure economic loss. Analysis of several relevant decided cases showed that the English courts had made some effort to reform their approach by allowing pure economic loss. However, subsequent decided cases showed that the courts in England still maintain their traditional approach by not allowing claims for pure economic loss. On the other hand, the development of cases in Malaysia in the1990s and early 2000 showed a significant development whereby the claims for pure economic loss in relation to defective buildings were allowed. Whether the courts in this country will allow claims for pure economic loss in other negligent cases, are yet to be ascertained. Nevertheless, this development shows the willingness of the Malaysian courts to create its own common law principles.

AB - Pure economic loss claims do not receive favaourable treatment from courts. The courts are too cautious in allowing claims for pure economic loss. This may be due to various factors, such as, the difficulty in determining the amount of damages and there is also an apprehension that many people will take advantage by making fictitious claims. Adopting the content analysis methodology on the decided cases in England and Malaysia, the objective of this article is to analyse the decided cases in England and Malaysia pertaining to pure economic loss and thereafter compare the approach taken by the courts in both countries in the aspect of their willingness to allow claims for pure economic loss. Analysis of several relevant decided cases showed that the English courts had made some effort to reform their approach by allowing pure economic loss. However, subsequent decided cases showed that the courts in England still maintain their traditional approach by not allowing claims for pure economic loss. On the other hand, the development of cases in Malaysia in the1990s and early 2000 showed a significant development whereby the claims for pure economic loss in relation to defective buildings were allowed. Whether the courts in this country will allow claims for pure economic loss in other negligent cases, are yet to be ascertained. Nevertheless, this development shows the willingness of the Malaysian courts to create its own common law principles.

KW - Defective building

KW - England

KW - Malaysia

KW - Negligence

KW - Pure economic loss

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044264607&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044264607&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 51

JO - Jurnal Pengurusan

JF - Jurnal Pengurusan

SN - 0127-2713

ER -