TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD 1. ) TEBRAU BAY CONSTRUCTIONS SDN. BHD. 2. ) ISKANDAR WATERFRONT CITY BERHAD 3. ) TEBRAU BAY SDN BHD (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI KPRJ NUSANTARA SDN BHD) PIHAK KETIGA PEMBINAAN HAMID ABD RAHMAN SDN BHD PIHAK TERKILAN 1. )

TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD 1. ) TEBRAU BAY CONSTRUCTIONS SDN. BHD. 2. ) ISKANDAR WATERFRONT CITY BERHAD 3. ) TEBRAU BAY SDN BHD (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI KPRJ NUSANTARA SDN BHD) PIHAK KETIGA PEMBINAAN HAMID ABD RAHMAN SDN BHD PIHAK TERKILAN 1. )

Application to amend was dismissed because Plaintiff offered no reasonable explanation for nearly two years' delay in bringing the amendment, the application was not bona fide but tactical, the proposed amendment would materially alter the character and quantum of the action (an increase of about RM56.6 million and temporal expansion), and the defendants would suffer serious prejudice not remediable by costs; Hong Leong and Yamaha authorities were applied.

Citation
JA-22NCvC-149-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintif: Tenaga Nasional Berhad; Defendan Pertama: Tebrau Bay Constructions Sdn Bhd; Defendan Kedua: Iskandar Waterfront City Berhad; Defendan Ketiga: Tebrau Bay Sdn Bhd; Pihak Ketiga: Pembinaan Hamid Abdul Rahman Sdn Bhd; Pihak Keempat: Radiant Seas Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 November 2025
Case Number
JA-22NCvC-149-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Amendment Application / Interlocutory Decision on Application to Amend Statement of Claim
Outcome
Application to amend (Encl. 287) dismissed without costs
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Overriding Objective, Limitation, Prejudice, Change of Character of Action
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Construction/infrastructure Tort Negligence and Trespass Energy/utilities Amendment of Pleadings Overriding Objective Limitation Prejudice +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tenaga Nasional Berhad

Plaintif

Tebrau Bay Constructions Sdn Bhd

Defendan Pertama

Iskandar Waterfront City Berhad

Defendan Kedua

Tebrau Bay Sdn Bhd

Defendan Ketiga

Pembinaan Hamid Abdul Rahman Sdn Bhd

Pihak Ketiga

Radiant Seas Sdn Bhd

Pihak Keempat

Procedural Posture

Civil Amendment Application / Interlocutory Decision on Application to Amend Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was gross/unreasonable delay in filing the amendment application
  2. 2 Whether the amendment application was made bona fide or was tactical/abusive
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendment altered the character/nature of the action

Ratio Decidendi

Application to amend was dismissed because Plaintiff offered no reasonable explanation for nearly two years' delay in bringing the amendment, the application was not bona fide but tactical, the proposed amendment would materially alter the character and quantum of the action (an increase of about RM56.6 million and temporal expansion), and the defendants would suffer serious prejudice not remediable by costs; Hong Leong and Yamaha authorities were applied.

Court Disposition

Application to amend (Encl. 287) dismissed without costs

Orders

  • Permohonan Plaintif di Encl. 287 untuk meminda Pernyataan Tuntutan Terpinda ditolak tanpa kos