Successful Setting Aside of Judgment in Default at Kuala Lumpur Magistrates’ Court
Date of Decision: 16 January 2026
Judgment : Judgment in Default set aside and costs of RM1,500.00 payable to the Defendant (our Client)
Court: Kuala Lumpur Magistrates’ Court
We, JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors has successfully set aside a Judgment in Default entered against our client (the Defendant) in an employment-related dispute—despite the fact that the Defendant had acknowledged receipt of court documents and had attended one case management before the Magistrate.
This outcome highlights that Malaysian courts will prioritise substantive justice and a fair trial, even where procedural compliance exists, provided there are triable issues and the interests of justice warrant the matter being heard on its merits.
Overview of the Case
The Defendant was formerly employed by the Plaintiff company. Following resignation, a dispute arose during the notice period and handover stage.
The Plaintiff relied on an employment contract clause stating that all company property, including company email accounts, belonged to the company. On that basis, the Plaintiff alleged that:
- The Defendant had deleted emails from a company-designated personal email account during the resignation period;
- The Plaintiff incurred email recovery costs amounting to RM30,000.00; and
- The Plaintiff further claimed exemplary damages against the Defendant.
A Judgment in Default was subsequently obtained against our client, prompting an application to set aside the judgment.
Key Legal Arguments Argued
In applying to set aside the Judgment in Default, we focused on clear and compelling triable issues, including the following:
1. Burden of Proof on Alleged Deletion of Emails
We argued that the Plaintiff must first prove, with evidence, that any deletion of emails had actually occurred. Mere allegations—without proper forensic or documentary proof—were insufficient to sustain liability, let alone justify a default judgment.
2. Existence of Alternative Company Devices
It was highlighted that the Plaintiff had also provided the Defendant with a tablet device, which potentially contained company emails or data. This raised serious questions as to:
- Whether emails were truly lost; and
- Whether the Plaintiff had exhausted all reasonable avenues to access or retrieve company data.
3. Excessive Email Recovery Costs
The Plaintiff claimed RM30,000.00 for email recovery. We submitted that:
- Such costs were prima facie excessive; and
- The Plaintiff had a duty to mitigate losses, including by considering more affordable recovery options reasonably available in the market.
4. Exemplary Damages Were Not Automatically Justified
We further argued that claims for exemplary damages in an employment context are not automatic and must be strictly proven. At the very least, such claims raised serious questions of fact and law that could not be resolved through a default judgment.
The Court’s Decision
On 16 January 2026, the Kuala Lumpur Magistrates’ Court allowed our application and:
- Set aside the Judgment in Default in its entirety; and
- Ordered the Plaintiff to pay costs of RM1,500.00 to our client.
This decision allows the matter to proceed on its merits, ensuring that the Defendant is given a fair opportunity to defend the claim at trial.
Legal Principles Involved
This case is particularly significant because the Judgment in Default was set aside even though:
- The Defendant had acknowledged service of court documents; and
- The Defendant had attended at least one case management session.
The ruling reinforces several important legal principles:
- Courts are reluctant to shut out a defence where genuine triable issues exist;
- Procedural defaults do not automatically override the need for substantive justice; and
- Claims involving alleged data deletion, recovery costs, and exemplary damages require proper evidence and scrutiny.
Legal Insight: Employment Disputes and Company Email Claims
Employers frequently rely on contractual clauses asserting ownership over company emails and digital assets. However, this case demonstrates that:
- Ownership clauses do not dispense with the need for proof of wrongdoing;
- Alleged data loss must be supported by credible technical evidence; and
- Claimed recovery costs must be reasonable, proportionate, and mitigated.
Need a Lawyer to Set Aside a Judgment in Default in Malaysia?
If you are facing a Judgment in Default, whether in an employment dispute or otherwise, timely legal action is critical. Each case turns on its facts, but strong legal arguments and evidence of triable issues can make the difference.
We, JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors regularly represents clients in:
- Applications to set aside judgments
- Employment and contractual disputes
- Claims involving alleged misuse of company property and data
- Magistrates’ Court and Sessions Court litigation in Kuala Lumpur
📞 Contact us today to discuss how we can protect your legal rights and restore your opportunity to be heard in court.
Written on: 16th January 2026
Contact JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors to make an appointment today!
🌐 Call us: +6017.6965.966 (Call / WhatsApp)
📩 Email Us: nick@jykolaw.com
Or fill in the contact form CLICK HERE
Disclaimer: The above proposition is subject to actual facts and circumstances and shall never be referred as the actual law without seeking legal advice. Consult us for more information!