KHALEEG MARKETING SDN. BHD. SHAOXING COUNTY BAIMEI TRADE CO., LTD

KHALEEG MARKETING SDN. BHD. SHAOXING COUNTY BAIMEI TRADE CO., LTD

The claim was struck out because it sought to relitigate and effectively vary a final and conclusive judgment on the same issues (liability for the AR Bright invoices); the doctrine of res judicata (issue and cause of action estoppel) barred the fresh action and it constituted an abuse of process; the supporting affidavit/Power of Attorney was valid and any procedural defects were acquiesced to; the counterclaim did not preclude striking out the abusive claim.

Citation
WA-22NCC-615-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff / First Defendant (in Counterclaim): KHALEEG MARKETING SDN BHD; Defendant / Plaintiff (in Counterclaim): SHAOXING COUNTY BAIMEI TRADE CO., LTD; Second Defendant (in Counterclaim): ALAM BIN MUHAMMAD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 May 2025
Case Number
WA-22NCC-615-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
High Court of Malaya (commercial Division) Civil Suit / Striking Out Application Under Order 18 R 19(1)(d) – Judgment Allowing Application
Outcome
Plaintiff's writ and statement of claim struck out as abuse of process and barred by res judicata; application allowed with costs
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Issue Estoppel, Cause of Action Estoppel, Functus Officio, Striking Out, Assignment of Debt, Power of Attorney
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Res Judicata Enforcement of Judgment Jurisdiction Company Law Abuse of Process Issue Estoppel Cause of Action Estoppel +4 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KHALEEG MARKETING SDN BHD

Plaintiff / First Defendant (in Counterclaim)

SHAOXING COUNTY BAIMEI TRADE CO., LTD

Defendant / Plaintiff (in Counterclaim)

ALAM BIN MUHAMMAD

Second Defendant (in Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

High Court of Malaya (commercial Division) Civil Suit / Striking Out Application Under Order 18 R 19(1)(d) – Judgment Allowing Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the fresh suit is an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of res judicata (issue and cause of action estoppel) bars the claim
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant reliefs that would vary a final judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out because it sought to relitigate and effectively vary a final and conclusive judgment on the same issues (liability for the AR Bright invoices); the doctrine of res judicata (issue and cause of action estoppel) barred the fresh action and it constituted an abuse of process; the supporting affidavit/Power of Attorney was valid and any procedural defects were acquiesced to; the counterclaim did not preclude striking out the abusive claim.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's writ and statement of claim struck out as abuse of process and barred by res judicata; application allowed with costs

Orders

  • Writ dated 12.9.2024 and Statement of Claim dated 16.10.2024 struck out
  • Costs of RM5,000.00 awarded to Shaoxing County Baimei Trade Co., Ltd