Safe box hirers v Public Bank - Back to the High Court.

UPDATE (6.39pm): Here's a message from lawyer Tan Kim Soon who is representing the 33 hirers.

The Court of Appeal decision currently affects the 16th to 33rd hirers only (who signed an agreement with Hock Hua prior the merger with Public Bank). The fate of the 1st to 15 hirers will be determined next Tuesday when the High Court will decide whether the dismissal of a somewhat similar claim by another hirer by another judge is binding on the 1st to 15th hirers.

Note: 1st-15th hirer signed agreements with Public Bank while 16th-33rd hirer signed with Hock Hua. Public Bank and Hock Hua merged in 2001.

Would you keep your prized possessions in the safe deposit box of a bank?

Ask the 33 safe box hirers who were given an extra lifeline after the Court of Appeal had set aside the decision by the High Court pertaining the case involving a robbery at Public Bank in Seri Kembangan during the Hari Raya holidays in 2006.

The COA, had last week, stated;

1. Rayuan dibenarkan
2. Perintah Mahkamah Tinggi bertarikh 29/06/2010 diketepikan
3. Desposit dikembalikan kepada Perayu-Perayu
4. Kos rayuan ini dijadikan kos dalam kuasa

Thus the 33 will be able to seek for justice, yet again, in the High Court in a bid to get Public Bank to reimburse their losses.

The outcome of this case could set a precedent as many believe safe box hirers are at the losing end when depositing their prize possession with financial institutions.

A safe box hirer had earlier sued Public Bank for the loss of her belongings as seen here but her suit was dismissed by the High Court last year, as seen here.

Now the 33 are hoping for a promising outcome.

HD says: Hmm..


Popular posts from this blog

Tickets for Kuala Lumpur Masters Malaysia Super 100 2023 now available

Pelepasan cukai tambahan untuk pembelian alatan sukan, sewaan fasiliti sukan antara cadangan untuk Bajet 2024

From 'Mr P' to 'Kemelut Dalaman BAM': Four chapters of 'mesej Whatsapp layang'