SANJUNG SEPANG SDN BHD KIENSON HARDWARE SDN. BHD.

SANJUNG SEPANG SDN BHD KIENSON HARDWARE SDN. BHD.

Plaintiff's claim for interest failed because it did not produce the invoices necessary to prove when payments were due and how interest accrued, justifying an adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act 1950; defendant's counterclaim failed because the plaintiff's acceptance contained a binding price validity condition relieving it of obligation to deliver at the earlier price, therefore no liability for defendant's additional procurement costs.

Citation
WA-12BNCC-23-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff / Appellant (appeal 22); Respondent (appeal 23): Kienson Hardware Sdn Bhd (701417-W); Defendant / Respondent (appeal 22); Appellant (appeal 23): Sanjung Sepang Sdn Bhd (577374-W)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 June 2024
Case Number
WA-12BNCC-23-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal to High Court / Judgment on Appeals From Sessions Court; Appeals Dismissed
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; High Court affirms Sessions Court decision
Legal Topics
Interest on Late Payments, Failure to Deliver Goods, Adverse Inference Under Evidence Act 1950 S114(g), Price Validity Condition in Acceptance, Sufficiency of Documentary Proof
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Evidence Commercial Law Civil Procedure Interest on Late Payments Failure to Deliver Goods Adverse Inference Under Evidence Act 1950 S114(g) Price Validity Condition in Acceptance +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kienson Hardware Sdn Bhd (701417-W)

Plaintiff / Appellant (appeal 22); Respondent (appeal 23)

Sanjung Sepang Sdn Bhd (577374-W)

Defendant / Respondent (appeal 22); Appellant (appeal 23)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal to High Court / Judgment on Appeals From Sessions Court; Appeals Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff was entitled to 1.5% per month interest on late payments claimed
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff produced sufficient documentary evidence (invoices) to prove interest claimed
  3. 3 Whether an adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act 1950 was justified from non-production of invoices

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff's claim for interest failed because it did not produce the invoices necessary to prove when payments were due and how interest accrued, justifying an adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act 1950; defendant's counterclaim failed because the plaintiff's acceptance contained a binding price validity condition relieving it of obligation to deliver at the earlier price, therefore no liability for defendant's additional procurement costs.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; High Court affirms Sessions Court decision

Orders

  • Appeal WA-12BNCC-22-08/2023 dismissed
  • Appeal WA-12BNCC-23-08/2023 dismissed