MPM Project Management Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat 1129096-K) Kin Keong Electric Engineering Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat 464788-A)

MPM Project Management Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat 1129096-K) Kin Keong Electric Engineering Sdn Bhd (No. Syarikat 464788-A)

The trial judge's factual findings were correct and not vitiated by error: the plaintiff proved entitlement to the outstanding progressive payment and the defendant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities its counterclaims for omission, defective works and LAD; unilateral re-measurement violated contract terms...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AB - 12B NCVC - 19 - 09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: MPM Project Management Sdn Bhd; Respondent/plaintiff: Kin Keong Electric Engineering Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 September 2020
Case Number
AB - 12B NCVC - 19 - 09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (building Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Payment Dispute, Counterclaim, Liquidated and Ascertained Damages, Omission of Work, Defective Works, Retention Sum, Performance Bond, Set Off, Burden of Proof, Section 75 Contracts Act 1950
Contract Law Construction/building Contract Civil Procedure Evidence Law Payment Dispute Counterclaim Liquidated and Ascertained Damages Omission of Work +6 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MPM Project Management Sdn Bhd

Appellant/defendant

Kin Keong Electric Engineering Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (building Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff was entitled to outstanding progressive payment of RM107,993.05
  2. 2 Whether defendant could set off/deduct RM386,256.21 for omission of works
  3. 3 Whether defendant proved defective works and costs of rectification of RM35,000

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's factual findings were correct and not vitiated by error: the plaintiff proved entitlement to the outstanding progressive payment and the defendant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities its counterclaims for omission, defective works and LAD; unilateral re-measurement violated contract terms and no loss was proven under s75 Contracts Act 1950, therefore the appeal is dismissed and the judgment for the plaintiff is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs of RM3500 to be paid by defendant/appellant MPM Project Management Sdn Bhd