HOLSTEN MARKETING (M) SDN BHD XIAN JIANG TRADING SDN BHD

HOLSTEN MARKETING (M) SDN BHD XIAN JIANG TRADING SDN BHD

The High Court found the writ and statement of claim were validly served on the defendant company by handing them to the director, the affidavit of service affirmed by the solicitor was admissible because the solicitor had personal knowledge, the Registrar's administrative amendment of the interest commencement date under Order 42 r.12 was permissible and beneficial to the defendant, the defendant had not shown a meritorious defence nor made full candid disclosure, and therefore the Sessions Court correctly refused to set aside the default judgment; the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
JB-12ANCC-3-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Holsten Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd; Respondent / Plaintiff: Xian Jiang Trading Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 May 2023
Case Number
JB-12ANCC-3-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Judgment in Default / Rehearing on Appeal Before High Court (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of Sessions Court dated 23.05.2022 upheld
Legal Topics
Service of Writ, Affidavit of Service, Setting Aside Default Judgment, Solicitor Affirming Affidavit, Interest on Judgment
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Company Law Service of Writ Affidavit of Service Setting Aside Default Judgment Solicitor Affirming Affidavit Interest on Judgment

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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Holsten Marketing (M) Sdn Bhd

Appellant / Defendant

Xian Jiang Trading Sdn Bhd

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Refusal to Set Aside Judgment in Default / Rehearing on Appeal Before High Court (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of the writ and statement of claim on the defendant company was valid
  2. 2 Whether an affidavit of service may be affirmed by a solicitor in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether amendment by the Registrar to the commencement date for interest on the judgment was permissible without a formal application

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found the writ and statement of claim were validly served on the defendant company by handing them to the director, the affidavit of service affirmed by the solicitor was admissible because the solicitor had personal knowledge, the Registrar's administrative amendment of the interest commencement date under Order 42 r.12 was permissible and beneficial to the defendant, the defendant had not shown a meritorious defence nor made full candid disclosure, and therefore the Sessions Court correctly refused to set aside the default judgment; the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of Sessions Court dated 23.05.2022 upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs in favour of Respondent