Ambank (M) Berhad Vacation Asia International Sdn Bhd & 2 Lagi

Ambank (M) Berhad Vacation Asia International Sdn Bhd & 2 Lagi

Plaintiff fulfilled Order 14 preliminary requirements and produced contemporaneous contractual documents; contractual terms authorized uplift of the fixed deposit and deemed service by post; defendants did not rebut presumptions or demonstrate bona fide triable issues or manifest error in the plaintiff's statement of indebtedness; therefore summary judgment was appropriate and entered for the plaintiff against all three defendants.

Citation
22NCC-658-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: AMBANK (M) BERHAD; 1st Defendant: VACATION ASIA INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD; 2nd Defendant: DATO' GAN ENG KWONG; 3rd Defendant: DATIN IRENE TAN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 March 2020
Case Number
22NCC-658-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Banking/contract (debt Recovery) / High Court Summary Judgment (application Allowed)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Guarantee and Indemnity, Security by Fixed Deposit, Default Interest, Service of Process, Conclusive Evidence Clause
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Banking Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Guarantee and Indemnity Security by Fixed Deposit Default Interest Service of Process +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMBANK (M) BERHAD

Plaintiff

VACATION ASIA INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD

1st Defendant

DATO' GAN ENG KWONG

2nd Defendant

DATIN IRENE TAN

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Banking/contract (debt Recovery) / High Court Summary Judgment (application Allowed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff satisfied preliminary requirements for summary judgment under Order 14 RoC 2012
  2. 2 Whether defendants raised bona fide triable issues or circumstances requiring investigation at trial
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff validly uplifted fixed deposit under the Memorandum of Deposit

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff fulfilled Order 14 preliminary requirements and produced contemporaneous contractual documents; contractual terms authorized uplift of the fixed deposit and deemed service by post; defendants did not rebut presumptions or demonstrate bona fide triable issues or manifest error in the plaintiff's statement of indebtedness; therefore summary judgment was appropriate and entered for the plaintiff against all three defendants.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for plaintiff against 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants

Orders

  • Judgment for outstanding sum RM1,523,053.70 as at 31.10.2019
  • Interest on the said sum at 3.5% per annum above AmBank base lending rate (KPA) (KPA at time stated as 6.70% p.a.), calculated daily from 1.11.2019 until full settlement