DATO' MOHAMAD BIN SHAHUL HAMEED DATIN MAZITA BINTI OSMAN

DATO' MOHAMAD BIN SHAHUL HAMEED DATIN MAZITA BINTI OSMAN

The Court of Appeal held that the cause of action accrued in October 2017 when the respondent ceased drawings, so the claim filed April 2018 was not statute-barred; contemporaneous documents and continued payment of drawings established an oral partnership and 50% profit entitlement (or at least a binding partnership relationship) and the respondent, having stepped into DS's role, was bound; the High Court erred in failing to give appropriate weight to documentary evidence and in misassessing credibility. Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; judgment entered for appellant per claimed reliefs; costs awarded RM35,000.

Citation
C-02(NCvC)(W)-655-04/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Dato’ Mohamad Bin Shahul Hameed; Respondent/defendant: Datin Mazita Binti Osman
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 November 2022
Case Number
C-02(NCvC)(W)-655-04/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (partnership and Breach of Contract) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Kuantan High Court (full Trial Verdict Set Aside)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; judgment entered for appellant
Legal Topics
Existence of Partnership (oral), Breach of Contract (cessation of Drawings), Limitation Period — Limitation Act 1953 S.6, Privity of Contract, Weight of Contemporaneous Documentary Evidence, Estoppel, Relief: Declaration and Account
Source Language
Malay/English
Partnership Law Contract Law Limitation Law Evidence Law Civil Procedure Existence of Partnership (oral) Breach of Contract (cessation of Drawings) Limitation Period — Limitation Act 1953 S.6 +4 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dato’ Mohamad Bin Shahul Hameed

Appellant/plaintiff

Datin Mazita Binti Osman

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (partnership and Breach of Contract) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Kuantan High Court (full Trial Verdict Set Aside)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's cause of action was statute-barred under s.6 Limitation Act 1953
  2. 2 Whether an oral partnership agreement existed between the appellant and DS entitling appellant to 50% profit-loss sharing in Kuantan branch
  3. 3 Whether the respondent, as successor partner, was bound by that agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the cause of action accrued in October 2017 when the respondent ceased drawings, so the claim filed April 2018 was not statute-barred; contemporaneous documents and continued payment of drawings established an oral partnership and 50% profit entitlement (or at least a binding partnership relationship) and the respondent, having stepped into DS's role, was bound; the High Court erred in failing to give appropriate weight to documentary evidence and in misassessing credibility. Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; judgment entered for appellant per claimed reliefs; costs awarded RM35,000.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; judgment entered for appellant

Orders

  • Set aside the decision of the Kuantan High Court
  • Judgment entered for the Appellant as per reliefs claimed in paragraph 53(a)–(k) of the Statement of Claim (including declaration of partnership/50% share and orders for accounts/specific performance)