MUHAMMAH ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH MENTARI DHUHA SDN BHD

MUHAMMAH ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH MENTARI DHUHA SDN BHD

The plaintiff proved a prima facie case that the defendant, as stakeholder, undertook to refund RM380,000 if no contract was executed within three months; the defendant failed to show any meritorious triable issue or defence on the merits; therefore summary judgment under Order 14 r.2 ROC 2012 was proper and the striking out application under Order 18 r.19 ROC 2012 was redundant and unsustainable. The High Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the Session Court’s orders.

Citation
WA-12ANCVC-104-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Muhammah Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah; Respondent/plaintiff: Mentari Dhuha Sdn. Bhd.
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 March 2020
Case Number
WA-12ANCVC-104-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Session's Court (summary Judgment and Striking Out) / High Court Appeal (consolidated Appeals)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; Session Court judgment (summary judgment) and refusal to strike out affirmed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment Under Order 14 R.2 ROC 2012, Striking Out Under Order 18 R.19 ROC 2012, Stakeholding/undertaking, Breach of Trust, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Trusts and Fiduciary Duty Legal Profession and Professional Conduct Summary Judgment Under Order 14 R.2 ROC 2012 Striking Out Under Order 18 R.19 ROC 2012 Stakeholding/undertaking Breach of Trust +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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammah Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah

Appellant/defendant

Mentari Dhuha Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Session's Court (summary Judgment and Striking Out) / High Court Appeal (consolidated Appeals)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case entitling it to summary judgment under Order 14 r.2 ROC 2012
  2. 2 Whether the defendant discharged the burden to show a bona fide triable issue or arguable defence
  3. 3 Whether the defendant, as stakeholder, had a fiduciary duty/obligation to refund the commitment fee upon non‑occurrence of the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff proved a prima facie case that the defendant, as stakeholder, undertook to refund RM380,000 if no contract was executed within three months; the defendant failed to show any meritorious triable issue or defence on the merits; therefore summary judgment under Order 14 r.2 ROC 2012 was proper and the striking out application under Order 18 r.19 ROC 2012 was redundant and unsustainable. The High Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the Session Court’s orders.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; Session Court judgment (summary judgment) and refusal to strike out affirmed.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered in favour of Mentari Dhuha Sdn. Bhd. against Muhammah Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah affirmed
  • Appeal WA-12ANCVC-104-05/2019 dismissed with costs RM5,000.00