The Limitation (Amendment) Act 2018 ("Amendment Act")

 Passed by the Malaysian Parliament on 4 April 2018, came into force on 1 September 2019.
 It provides for the extension of limitation period in cases of negligence not involving personal injuries and the
postponement of commencement of limitation period for persons under disability.

Before Amendment:

Section 6(1) of LA 1953 provides that actions founded on a contract or on tort shall not be actionable after the expiration
of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. This means, the six years limitation period under Section
6(1) of LA 1953 begins to run when a cause of action of breach of contract has occurred or when damage had occurred
(for cause of action in tort), and this is irrespective of whether the damage was discovered or could reasonably have been
discovered at the time.

AmBank (M) Bhd v Abdul Aziz bin Hassan & Ors [2010] - it was argued that the cause of action for a tort-based claim
should only start to run when the damage was discovered. The Court of Appeal however disagreed and held that the
limitation period of 6 years starts to run regardless whether one discovers the damage.

The rule in the case of Abdul Aziz has been criticised for being unjust and leading to potential harsh results against parties
seeking to claim for latent damage. This is because most damages, such as structural defects, are commonly discoverable
or could only be reasonably discovered after the six years limitation period.\

Insertion of Section 6A:

Section 6A applies to any action for negligence not involving personal injuries. Section 6A brings about the following
effect:

1. The six-year limitation period is extended by section 6A. Section 6A provides that for the for cases of negligence not
involving personal injury, the time limit for bringing an action is 3 years from the date of the plaintiff’s knowledge.

2. Section 6A only applies if the three-year period expires later than the period of limitation under the Act as prescribed
by section 6(1).

3. A further caveat as provided by the Act is that no action shall be brought after the expiration of 15 years from the date
in which the cause of action accrued.

4. An example is where in 2004, P entered into a building contract with D, the contractors. P had knowledge of the
defect in structure of the swimming pool only in 2010. P has three years from 2010 to bring an action under
negligence for such defect. Without the insertion of section 6A, P would have been out of time to bring a civil suit and
claim damages.

Knowledge is aptly and appropriately defined in the Act. The plaintiff here may have knowledge of the material facts
about the damages sued for or knowledge of other facts relevant to the action. The latter has three components:

1. The damage was attributable in whole or in part to that act/omission which is alleged to constitute negligence.
2. The plaintiff discovered the identity of the defendant and, thirdly, where the act or omission was that of a person other
than the defendant, the identity of that person and the additional facts supporting the bringing of an action against the
defendant.
3. It also includes the knowledge which the plaintiff might reasonably have been expected to acquire from the facts
ascertainable by him or facts ascertainable with the help of expert advice which is reasonable for him to seek.