Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
GOVERNMENT LIABILITIES - Coggle Diagram
GOVERNMENT
LIABILITIES
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY IN TORT
Government Proceedings Act 1956
S.5
3 elements to be fulfilled for the government to be liable on any wrongful act, neglect or default committed by any public officer
That officer is a government officer as stated in S.6(4).
That officer acted in good faith.
That officer acted under the orders/ instructions of the government
S.6(1)
An officer must be named to take an action against the government for neglect or default by a public officer
S.6(2)
If any written law negatives or limits the liability of the officer in respect of any act, neglect or default committed by him, then to that extent, the liability of the government is also limited or negatived
S.6(3)
No action can be brought against the government for any acts done or omitted to be done by a person exercising a judicial function
S.6(4)
The government is liable for any act, neglect or default of an officer employed by the government and paid in respect of his duties out of the government revenues
S.7(1)
No proceedings are to lie against the government according to anything done or omitted to be done by government or any public officer in exercise of the public duties of the government
S.7(2)
Exercise of public duties include:
Construction, maintenance, etc. of railways, roads, bridlepaths or bridges.
Construction, maintenance, etc. of schools, hospitals or other public buildings.
Drainage, flood prevention and reclamation work.
Of channels, rivers and waterways.
S.7(3)
However, a party may sue for damages or compensation arising out of negligence or trespass in the execution of any works of construction or maintenance undertaken by the government in the exercise of its public duty
S.22
If one wishes to sue the State Government, one must file the suit against the State Government, not against any individual party.
Reference Cases
Mohammad Raihan bin Ibrahim v Govt of Malaysia (1981)
The Federal Court allowed the appellant to appeal, saying that even though there is an element of negligent in the case, but the respondent failed to give proper instruction as to the use of agricultural tools.
The court also concluded that the respondents failed to take all reasonable and proper steps to prevent the appellant from sustaining the injury. The teacher did not check the tools condition or provide a safe system of holding the gardening class.
Govt of Malaysia v Jumat bin Mohamed (1977)
The court held that, the teacher failed to give sufficient warning as to the use of equipment, nor had taken steps to positioned the students with such distance between them to avoid injuries. The court thus granted damages