For this case review, among the cases we have chosen is the case of Chan Chin Ming and Anor v Lim Yok Eng [1994] 3 MLJ 233 The reason we choose this case is because only in this case we can apply it to many legal issues related to dependency claim. This case is basically related to section 7 of the Civil Law Act, 1956. This is a High Court case which was later appealed by the defendant to the Supreme Court and was handled by three judges. They are Peh Swee Chin, Edgar Joseph Jr and Muhamed Dzaiddin SCJJ. This case was reported by the founder of our Kulliyah, Professor Ahmad Ibrahim. This case involved a plaintiff asserting dependency claims against the defendant. The plaintiff was Lim Yok Eng, the mother of a 25-year-old unmarried son who was involved in a fatal accident with the defendant Chan Chin Ming. The plaintiff had sought loss of support from the defendant due to the accident. The plaintiff's application to the High Court was successful. The High Court awards the appellant RM144,000 based on a base figure of RM750 per month. RM750 is the average monthly amount the deceased gave to the plaintiff, his mother, before his death. The defendant then appealed to the Supreme Court (Johor Bahru). The first appeal was that the RM750 should be reduced by half. This is because the mother spent only half of that sum on herself. The balance he used for his other three children who were still in school. The second appeal was for the court to follow the fixed number of purchase years as set out in section 7(3)(iv)(d) of the Civil Law Act 1956 in a claim by a parent for loss of child support an unmarried son. the legal question in this case was first and foremost whether the sum of RM750 should be reduced by about half because the plaintiff only spent…half of the paper…the statute can be interpreted using many means and approaches, which will lead to different results. Having a different opinion with other jurists is not something wrong. You may have different opinions about a law. However, the important thing is that when you have different opinions and justifications related to certain laws, your opinion must be supported by authority. Whether it is law or jurisprudence. The next point we can learn from the case is that even though a law may seem harsh and harsh towards someone, it still had to be enforced. For example, the court's action in reducing RM750 to RM375 is certainly harsh on the plaintiff. However, if the court does not do so, there will be barriers in the future. Many people when sued for loss of support will also include their brother and sister, which would actually be unfair on the part of the defendant.