In a shocking turn of events, the family of a young Dutch model, Ivana Smit, has been left in limbo after a court halted a RM1.1 million award granted to them. But here's where it gets controversial... The Court of Appeal has decided to suspend the payment, citing 'special circumstances' while the government appeals the decision. This move has sparked intense debate, leaving many wondering: Is justice truly being served?
On November 18, 2025, a three-judge panel, led by Justice Zaini Mazlan, unanimously agreed to the government’s request to stay the payment. The court acknowledged that the government’s appeal raises valid concerns, particularly regarding the mandatory orders issued by the High Court. Justices Ismail Brahim and Lim Hock Leng joined Zaini in this decision, emphasizing that proceeding with the payment could potentially jeopardize the appeal process. And this is the part most people miss... The court also noted that while the government’s payment process might face practical challenges, there’s no risk of non-payment if the appeal fails, and the delay causes minimal harm to Smit’s family.
To ensure fairness, the court has expedited the appeal process, scheduling an early hearing. Senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin represented the government, while SN Nair advocated for Smit’s family. Just a week earlier, Justice Roz Mawar Rozain had ordered the government to deposit the awarded sum, plus interest, into a trust account immediately. However, the government sought to delay this execution pending the appeal.
Smit’s family argued against the stay, claiming the government lacked exceptional grounds for delaying payment and had ignored previous court orders to reopen the investigation into her death. The High Court had earlier found the government and police negligent in their investigation, awarding RM500,000 in general damages and RM600,000 in aggravated and exemplary damages.
Ivana Smit, just 18 years old, was found dead on December 7, 2017, after a fatal fall from the 20th floor of CapSquare Residence. An initial 2018 inquest ruled her death a 'misadventure,' but the High Court later revised this, attributing her death to 'persons known or unknown.'
Here’s the bold question we’re left with: Is the court’s decision a fair balance between legal procedure and justice for Smit’s family, or does it unfairly prolong their suffering? Share your thoughts in the comments below and subscribe to our newsletter for more updates on this developing story.
