Alf System Sdn Bhd Acevantec Technology Sdn Bhd

Alf System Sdn Bhd Acevantec Technology Sdn Bhd

The court held that the Technical Proposal and contemporaneous conduct converted the stated delivery estimate into an essential term; Defendant failed to deliver, install and commission the system within the agreed timeframe and delivered incomplete goods; Plaintiff proved loss and incurred reasonable expenses and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
B52NCVC-245-07/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff: ALF SYSTEM SDN BHD; Defendant: ACEVANTEC TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 January 1900
Case Number
B52NCVC-245-07/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment entered for Plaintiff in part; Plaintiff's claims for breach of contract allowed in part; Defendant's counterclaim allowed nominally (partial allowance)
Legal Topics
Time Is of the Essence, Breach of Contract, Damages (general and Special), Liquidated Damages/penalty, Sub Contracting and Consent, Payment Terms (cod)
Contract Law Commercial Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Time Is of the Essence Breach of Contract Damages (general and Special) Liquidated Damages/penalty +2 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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ALF SYSTEM SDN BHD

Plaintiff

ACEVANTEC TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time was of the essence under the Technical Proposal and PO
  2. 2 Whether payment terms were Cash On Delivery or progressive payment
  3. 3 Whether the delivered Purified Water System was incomplete requiring Plaintiff to incur additional costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Technical Proposal and contemporaneous conduct converted the stated delivery estimate into an essential term; Defendant failed to deliver, install and commission the system within the agreed timeframe and delivered incomplete goods; Plaintiff proved loss and incurred reasonable expenses and is entitled to damages under s74 Contracts Act 1950; Defendant's counterclaim largely failed for lack of proof and documentary support, meriting only a nominal allowance.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for Plaintiff in part; Plaintiff's claims for breach of contract allowed in part; Defendant's counterclaim allowed nominally (partial allowance)

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded general damages RM6000.00
  • Plaintiff awarded special damages RM7,480.25