Paramisparan A/L Mariappan 1. ) Talent Team Sdn Bhd 2. ) Tetuan Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis

Paramisparan A/L Mariappan 1. ) Talent Team Sdn Bhd 2. ) Tetuan Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis

Appeal dismissed: RM5,000 was a stakeholder sum held by solicitors and not a booking fee so LAD accrues from the SPA date; the Housing Controller's extensions of time are valid and were not properly challenged in these proceedings (judicial review was the proper mode); consequently no LAD was payable and the 2nd...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-12ANCvC-61-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Paramisparan a/l Mariappan; 1st Respondent/developer/defendant: Talent Team Sdn. Bhd.; 2nd Respondent/stakeholder Solicitors/defendant: Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 October 2021
Case Number
WA-12ANCvC-61-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sessions Court (originating Summons Under Schedule H Hda) / Final Appellate Judgment on Rehearing Under Order 55 Rule 2, Rules of Court 2012
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; Sessions Court decision upheld
Legal Topics
Liquidated Ascertained Damages, Extension of Time (eot), Stakeholder Sum, Judicial Review, Release of Stakeholder Funds, Interpretation of Sale and Purchase Agreement
Contract Law Housing Development Act (hda) Administrative Law Trusts and Fiduciary Law Civil Procedure Liquidated Ascertained Damages Extension of Time (eot) Stakeholder Sum +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paramisparan a/l Mariappan

Appellant/plaintiff

Talent Team Sdn. Bhd.

1st Respondent/developer/defendant

Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis

2nd Respondent/stakeholder Solicitors/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sessions Court (originating Summons Under Schedule H Hda) / Final Appellate Judgment on Rehearing Under Order 55 Rule 2, Rules of Court 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 From what date do liquidated ascertained damages (LAD) accrue?
  2. 2 Was the RM5,000 payment a booking deposit or a stakeholder sum?
  3. 3 Was the Housing Controller's extension(s) of time valid and challengeable in these proceedings?

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed: RM5,000 was a stakeholder sum held by solicitors and not a booking fee so LAD accrues from the SPA date; the Housing Controller's extensions of time are valid and were not properly challenged in these proceedings (judicial review was the proper mode); consequently no LAD was payable and the 2nd Respondent cannot be compelled to release the stakeholder sum given clause 30(3), s22E HDA and solicitors' fiduciary/statutory duties.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; Sessions Court decision upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Decision of the learned Sessions Court judge is upheld