QTC TRANSFORMERS MARKETING SDN BHD GOODWOOD HOTEL SDN BHD

QTC TRANSFORMERS MARKETING SDN BHD GOODWOOD HOTEL SDN BHD

On a rehearing of the evidence (notes of first trial) the court accepted the defendants' expert evidence that improper earthing and maintenance (and consequent lightning-induced damage) caused the transformers' failures, found the quotation phrase "earthing system included" meant supply not external connection, held plaintiff failed to prove total failure of consideration or residual value, and therefore allowed D1's appeal, set aside the Second Sessions Judge's order and awarded costs to D1.

Citation
JA-12BNCvC-27-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/first Defendant: QTC TRANSFORMERS MARKETING SDN. BHD.; Respondent/plaintiff: GOODWOOD HOTEL SDN. BHD.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 June 2022
Case Number
JA-12BNCvC-27-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court Judgment on Appeal (rehearing on Notes of Evidence)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Order of the Second Sessions Judge set aside
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Total Failure of Consideration, Negligence in Installation, Scope of Work and Contractual Interpretation, Contra Proferentem, Standard of Appellate Review (plainly Wrong/rehearing)
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Tort (negligence) Evidence Civil Procedure Commercial Law Breach of Contract Total Failure of Consideration Negligence in Installation +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

QTC TRANSFORMERS MARKETING SDN. BHD.

Appellant/first Defendant

GOODWOOD HOTEL SDN. BHD.

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court Judgment on Appeal (rehearing on Notes of Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the damage to the transformers was caused by defects for which D1 is liable or by improper earthing/maintenance attributable to the plaintiff and/or D2
  2. 2 Whether D1’s contractual scope of work included connecting a separate earthing system to the transformers
  3. 3 Whether there was total failure of consideration by D1 in respect of the second transformer

Ratio Decidendi

On a rehearing of the evidence (notes of first trial) the court accepted the defendants' expert evidence that improper earthing and maintenance (and consequent lightning-induced damage) caused the transformers' failures, found the quotation phrase "earthing system included" meant supply not external connection, held plaintiff failed to prove total failure of consideration or residual value, and therefore allowed D1's appeal, set aside the Second Sessions Judge's order and awarded costs to D1.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Order of the Second Sessions Judge set aside

Orders

  • Appeal by D1 allowed
  • Order of the Second Sessions Judge set aside