1. ) Agasta Co. Ltd 2. ) Nippon Export and Investment Insurance AUTOPULENCE SDN BHD

1. ) Agasta Co. Ltd 2. ) Nippon Export and Investment Insurance AUTOPULENCE SDN BHD

The Court of Appeal held the contractual arrangements between the respondents and Rintis contravened the MITI Dasar Baharu AP Terbuka and amounted to arrangements intended to circumvent public policy; such contracts are void ab initio under section 24(e) Contracts Act 1950, therefore title to the 29 vehicles never passed to respondents notwithstanding payment; appeals allowed and deputy registrar's orders restored.

Citation
B-03(IM)-3-01/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant; Judgment Creditor: Agasta Co Ltd; Appellant; Subrogee/judgment Creditor: Nippon Export and Investment Insurance; Respondent; Claimant in Interpleader: Autopulence Sdn Bhd; Respondent; Claimant in Interpleader: JH Capital Sdn Bhd; Judgment Debtor; Execution Debtor; Defendant: Rintis Malay Motors Sdn Bhd
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 March 2025
Case Number
B-03(IM)-3-01/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal — Interpleader Arising From Execution Proceedings / Court of Appeal Judgment Allowing Appeal and Restoring Deputy Registrar's Orders
Outcome
Appeals allowed. Orders of the High Court (judicial commissioner) dated 5 January 2024 set aside. Orders of the deputy registrar restored.
Legal Topics
Illegality of Contracts, Interpleader Procedure, Approved Permit (open Ap) Policy Compliance, Burden of Proof in Interpleader, Contracts Act 1950 S24, Customs (prohibition of Imports) Order 2017
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Public Policy Customs and Import Control Civil Procedure Execution of Judgment Illegality of Contracts Interpleader Procedure Approved Permit (open Ap) Policy Compliance +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Agasta Co Ltd

Appellant; Judgment Creditor

Nippon Export and Investment Insurance

Appellant; Subrogee/judgment Creditor

Autopulence Sdn Bhd

Respondent; Claimant in Interpleader

JH Capital Sdn Bhd

Respondent; Claimant in Interpleader

Rintis Malay Motors Sdn Bhd

Judgment Debtor; Execution Debtor; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal — Interpleader Arising From Execution Proceedings / Court of Appeal Judgment Allowing Appeal and Restoring Deputy Registrar's Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents proved ownership of seized vehicles
  2. 2 Whether contractual arrangements with holder of Open APs contravened MITI policy
  3. 3 Whether contravention rendered contracts void under s24 of the Contracts Act 1950

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held the contractual arrangements between the respondents and Rintis contravened the MITI Dasar Baharu AP Terbuka and amounted to arrangements intended to circumvent public policy; such contracts are void ab initio under section 24(e) Contracts Act 1950, therefore title to the 29 vehicles never passed to respondents notwithstanding payment; appeals allowed and deputy registrar's orders restored.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed. Orders of the High Court (judicial commissioner) dated 5 January 2024 set aside. Orders of the deputy registrar restored.

Orders

  • Both appeals allowed with costs of RM20,000 here and below for each appeal, costs subject to allocatur
  • Orders of the High Court dated 5 January 2024 are set aside