YYT IMPORT & EXPORT SDN. BHD. LO SWEE LING

YYT IMPORT & EXPORT SDN. BHD. LO SWEE LING

The trial judge's factual findings accepting the Defendant's version were supported by contemporaneous documents and conduct; the Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden under s.101 Evidence Act 1950 to prove the alleged oral agreement; the cause of action accrued in September 2007 making the 2020 suit time-barred under s.6 Limitation Act 1953; appeal dismissed.

Citation
WA-12BNCvC-138-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: YYT Import & Export Sdn. Bhd. (Previously E-Mato Sdn. Bhd.); Respondent / Defendant: Lo Swee Ling
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 April 2023
Case Number
WA-12BNCvC-138-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (appeal From Sessions Court) / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Oral Agreement, Burden of Proof, Standard of Appellate Review, Redemption of Charge, Limitation Period Under S.6 Limitation Act 1953
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Evidence Civil Procedure Limitation Equity/property Oral Agreement Burden of Proof Standard of Appellate Review +2 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YYT Import & Export Sdn. Bhd. (Previously E-Mato Sdn. Bhd.)

Appellant / Plaintiff

Lo Swee Ling

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (appeal From Sessions Court) / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which party's version of an oral agreement should be preferred at trial
  2. 2 Whether appellate court should interfere with trial judge's findings of fact
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff's claim was time-barred under Section 6 Limitation Act 1953

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's factual findings accepting the Defendant's version were supported by contemporaneous documents and conduct; the Plaintiff failed to discharge the burden under s.101 Evidence Act 1950 to prove the alleged oral agreement; the cause of action accrued in September 2007 making the 2020 suit time-barred under s.6 Limitation Act 1953; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs RM 8,000 subject to allocatur