BINACHUAN SDN. BHD. AKS SEPAKAT SDN. BHD.

BINACHUAN SDN. BHD. AKS SEPAKAT SDN. BHD.

Court admitted ID3 as P3 relying on s.90A(6) and hearsay exception s.32(1)(b) together with s.73A and SP1's contemporaneous knowledge; contemporaneous invoices and account summaries established that Defendant made progressive payments but did not pay in full; conversion calculations were consistently expressed and accepted in cubic metres during the relevant period; Defendant failed to prove full payment or the counterclaim and raised issues late; accordingly Plaintiff's claim of RM94,668.78 succeeded and Defendant's appeal and counterclaim were dismissed.

Citation
JA-A72NCC-433-05/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Plaintiff: BINACHUAN SDN. BHD.; Defendant: AKS SEPAKAT SDN. BHD.
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 April 2022
Case Number
JA-A72NCC-433-05/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract Claim for Supply of Goods (debt Recovery) / Judgment at Full Trial (appeal by Defendant Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment entered for Plaintiff and Defendant's counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Computer Generated Documents, Breach of Contract, Conversion Factor Dispute (metric Ton to Cubic Metre), Debt Recovery, Counterclaim for Consequential Loss, Assessment of Damages, Interest and Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Evidence Civil Procedure Commercial Law Admissibility of Computer Generated Documents Breach of Contract Conversion Factor Dispute (metric Ton to Cubic Metre) Debt Recovery +3 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 7 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BINACHUAN SDN. BHD.

Plaintiff

AKS SEPAKAT SDN. BHD.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract Claim for Supply of Goods (debt Recovery) / Judgment at Full Trial (appeal by Defendant Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of ID3 (computer‑generated statement) without s.90A certificate
  2. 2 Whether Defendant had paid in full
  3. 3 Quantum of outstanding debt

Ratio Decidendi

Court admitted ID3 as P3 relying on s.90A(6) and hearsay exception s.32(1)(b) together with s.73A and SP1's contemporaneous knowledge; contemporaneous invoices and account summaries established that Defendant made progressive payments but did not pay in full; conversion calculations were consistently expressed and accepted in cubic metres during the relevant period; Defendant failed to prove full payment or the counterclaim and raised issues late; accordingly Plaintiff's claim of RM94,668.78 succeeded and Defendant's appeal and counterclaim were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment entered for Plaintiff and Defendant's counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Plaintiff RM94,668.78
  • Interest at 5% per annum on the claim from date of filing of the writ to date of judgment