Permohonan untuk pihak ketiga ditambah sebagai pihak ketiga di dalam satu prosiding/tindakan sivil perlu membuat permohonan kebenaran (leave) kepada mahkamah di bawah Aturan 16 Kaedah 2(2) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012
Dalam permohonan untuk mendapatkan kebenaran berkenaan, pihak Pemohon perlu menunjukkan melalui afidavitnya bahawa terdapat satu prima facie terhadap pihak Ketiga yang dicadangkan untuk dibawa masuk.
Mahkamah Rayuan dalam kes Dato' Abul Hasan bin Mohamed Rashid v. Multi-Code Electronics Industries & Anor [2012] menyatakan antara lain:
"The third party proceedings must be viewed as independent proceedings between the second defendant as plaintiff and the six directors as defendants... The second defendant in filing the third party application for indemnity and contribution, has to satisfy the court that there is a question proper to be tried as to the liability of the six directors to provide indemnity and make a contribution, be it in whole or in part. To put it differently, the second defendant has to show a prima facie case."
Tiada merit kes dibincangkan dan didengar oleh Hakim pada peringkat ini kecuali satu gambaran kepada afidavit yang menunjukkan bahawa terdapatnya prima facie sahaja. Jika Hakim berpuas hati, kebenaran diberikan bagi memasukkan Pihak Ketiga dan semua merit perlu dibuktikan semasa Bicara kelak.
Tindakan dan tuntutan dalam kertas kausa melibatkan pihak Ketiga perlu dibutirkan melalui plid secara jelas mengenai tindakan dan tuntutan serta pihak yang terlibat. Mahkamah Rayuan di dalam kes BPI International Finance Ltd v. Tengku Abdullah Ibni Sultan Abu Bakar [2009] antara lain memutuskan bahawa;
"In our view, where a person A is claiming to be indemnified by B in respect of his liability to C, he must plead with clarity the basis of his entitlement to such an indemnity, ie, whether it arises from any breach of contract, express or implied, or from any breach of duty of care, or otherwise to be implied from the nature of their relationship. It is not sufficient for him to merely include a prayer for an indemnity in the statement of claim without first stating the facts upon which such claim is founded."
Kegagalan untuk memplidkan butiran jelas dan kausa tindakan yang munasabah kepada tuntutan kepada pihak Ketiga boleh memberikan satu fatal kepada permohonan tersebut dan permohonan boleh ditolak. Mahkamah Tinggi dalam kes Inal Bina Sdn Bhd v. Mohd Rizzal bin Shamat (t/a as Kejuruteraan Perdana Teguh) (Bintang Kencana Sdn Bhd, third party) [2015] memutuskan bahawa;
"The contention of the third party here is that the defendant's third party notice on its face revealed no sustainable cause of action against the third party. The notice per se was devoid of particulars of how the third party is responsible for payment to the plaintiff."
Pemohon juga perlu buktikan wujudnya satu bukti hubungan diantara pihak Ketiga dan bukan sekadar kepada kausa tindakan tadi secara jelas dalam membuktikan wujudnya prima facie. Sebagaimana di dalam kes Sime Darby Bhd & Ors v. Dato' Seri Ahmad Zubair @ Ahmad Zubirbin Hj Murshid & Ors (Tun Musa Hitam & Ors, third parties) [2012] Mahkamah Tinggi cited daripada Privy Council antara lain;
"A right to indemnity generally arises from contract express or implied, but it is not confined to cases of contract A right to indemnity exists where the relation between the parties is such that either in law or in equity there is an obligation upon one party to indemnify the other."
Rujuk - A Santamil Selvi Alau Malay @ Anna Malay & Ors v. Dato Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak & Ors [2020]
0 komen:
Dah baca sila bagi sepatah kata..