Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

NEGLIGENCE – HOTEL LIABILITY: UNVEILING THE LEGAL RISKS IN NEGLIGENCE AND VICARIOUS LIABILITY CASES

Illustrative Scenario

X, the deceased, checks into the ABC Hotel and is found dead in his room several days later. Investigations reveal two suspects who allegedly used an access key card belonging to Y, a housekeeping assistant at the hotel, to enter X’s room.

The question arises whether X’s widow can bring a negligence claim against Y, and whether ABC Hotel and its owner can be held vicariously liable for Y’s actions if Y is found negligent.

Legal Principles

  • Burden of Proof: In a negligence claim, the burden of proof lies entirely with the party making the allegation. The claimant must establish their case before the burden shifts to the opposing party.
  • Elements of Negligence:
    1. The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care.
    2. The defendant breached that duty of care.
    3. The plaintiff suffered damage as a direct result of the breach, and the damage is not too remote.
  • Hotel’s Duty of Care:
    Courts have consistently held that hotels and their employees are responsible for safeguarding guest room keys. Hotels may be found negligent if unauthorized individuals gain access to guest rooms due to the hotel’s failure to properly secure keys. The duty of care extends to ensuring guest safety at all times.

Application to the Scenario

In this scenario, Y, as a housekeeping assistant responsible for maintaining guest rooms, had a duty to restrict access to the rooms strictly to authorized personnel. Y should have directed any unauthorized individuals to the hotel’s reception for verification. If Y allowed unauthorized access, Y could be held liable for negligence.

Vicarious Liability of the Hotel

ABC Hotel and its owner may be held vicariously liable if Y’s negligence was foreseeable and occurred during the course of Y’s employment. Given that Y’s actions directly led to harm suffered by X, it is likely that ABC Hotel and its owner would be found vicariously liable for Y’s negligence.

Reference Cases

  • Wang Cuilin (Suing as the lawful wife and the Administrator of the estate of Xie Ning) v. Nurul Suhaida bt Dahlan & Ors [2024] MLJU 1920
  • Wong Thin Yit v. Mohamed Ali [1971] 2 MLJ 175
  • Teoh Guat Looi (the Lawful Widow) Claiming for Herself and Her Two Children as the Defendants of Tay Kok Wah, Deceased v. Ng Hong Guan [1995] 1 CLJ 717
  • Projek Lebuh Raya Utara-Selatan Sdn Bhd v. Kim Seng Enterprise (Kedah) Sdn Bhd [2013] 6 CLJ 958
  • John C Fleming & Anor v. Sealion Hotels Ltd [1978] 2 MLJ 440
  • Kinta Riverfront Hotel & Suites Sdn Bhd v. Chang Yok Kee & Anor [2020] MLJU 61
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Sorotan Terkini

STRATA MANAGEMENT – MANAGEMENT FEE SHOWDOWN – RESIDENTIAL VS. COMMERCIAL – WHO’S PAYING FOR THE EXTRAS?

In a landmark decision in Aikbee Timbers Sdn Bhd & Anor v Yii Sing Chiu & Anor and another appeal [2024] 1 MLJ 94 , the Court of Appeal clarified the rules on maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions in mixed strata developments. Developers and management corporations can impose different rates based on the distinct purposes of residential and commercial parcels. The judgment emphasizes fairness, ensuring residential owners bear the costs of exclusive facilities like pools and gyms, while commercial owners aren’t subsidizing amenities they don’t use. This ruling highlights the importance of transparency in budgeting and equitable cost-sharing in mixed-use properties.

Read More »
16 Disember ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

ILLEGALITY OF UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS’ CLAIM – FINDER’S FEES AND ILLEGALITY: COURT DRAWS THE LINE ON UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS

In a pivotal ruling, the Court of Appeal clarified that finder’s fee agreements are not automatically void under the Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981. The Court emphasized that illegality must be specifically pleaded and supported by evidence, and isolated transactions do not trigger the Act’s prohibition. This decision highlights the importance of precise pleadings and a clear understanding of the law’s scope.

Read More »
16 Disember ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

COMPANIES ACT – OPPRESSION – DRAWING THE LINE: FEDERAL COURT DEFINES OPPRESSION VS. CORPORATE HARMS

In a decisive ruling, the Federal Court clarified the boundaries between personal shareholder oppression and corporate harm, overturning the Court of Appeal’s findings. The Court held that claims tied to the wrongful transfer of trademarks belonged to the company, not the individual shareholder, reaffirming that corporate harm must be addressed through a derivative action rather than an oppression claim.

Read More »
16 Disember ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

COMPANIES LAW – WHEN DIRECTORS BETRAY: COURT CONDEMNS BREACH OF TRUST AND CORPORATE MISCONDUCT

In a stark reminder of the consequences of corporate betrayal, the court found that the directors had systematically dismantled their own company to benefit a competing entity they controlled. By breaching their fiduciary duties, conspiring to harm the business, and unjustly enriching themselves, the defendants were held accountable through significant compensatory and exemplary damages, reaffirming the critical importance of trust and integrity in corporate governance.

Read More »
16 Disember ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »
17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan
ms_MYMY
en_USEN zh_TWZH ms_MYMY
× Hubungi Kami