1. ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. [COMPANY NO. 201401009891(1085970-T)] 2. MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. [COMPANY NO. 201401011437 (1087513-W)] 1. TANG TWANG LOI (NRIC NO. 661214-01-5151) 2. LAU TENG TIONG (NRIC NO. 710207-01-5629)

1. ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. [COMPANY NO. 201401009891(1085970-T)] 2. MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. [COMPANY NO. 201401011437 (1087513-W)] 1. TANG TWANG LOI (NRIC NO. 661214-01-5151) 2. LAU TENG TIONG (NRIC NO. 710207-01-5629)

The court held the Sessions Court Judge's leave to withdraw the summary judgment application with liberty to file afresh was not an appealable decision because it was a non‑final ruling within the meaning of Section 3 CJA as interpreted by the Federal Court; further, the Sessions Court Judge did not abuse his discretion on costs given the Defendants' unreasonable conditional stance in correspondence, so the costs order in the cause was upheld; appeal dismissed with costs RM3,000.

Citation
JA- 12ANCVC-9-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.; Appellant: MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.; Respondent: TANG TWANG LOI; Respondent: LAU TENG TIONG
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 October 2020
Case Number
JA- 12ANCVC-9-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sessions Court (civil) / Judgment on Appeal (interlocutory Matters)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Withdrawal of Application, Interlocutory Appeal, Appealability, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Property Summary Judgment Withdrawal of Application Interlocutory Appeal Appealability Costs

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ERA UNIVERSE DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

Appellant

MARSLAND DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

Appellant

TANG TWANG LOI

Respondent

LAU TENG TIONG

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sessions Court (civil) / Judgment on Appeal (interlocutory Matters)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court Judge's leave to withdraw the summary judgment application with liberty to file afresh is an appealable decision under Section 3 CJA
  2. 2 Whether the Sessions Court Judge erred in awarding costs in the cause rather than awarding costs to the Defendants given the Plaintiffs' concession and correspondence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the Sessions Court Judge's leave to withdraw the summary judgment application with liberty to file afresh was not an appealable decision because it was a non‑final ruling within the meaning of Section 3 CJA as interpreted by the Federal Court; further, the Sessions Court Judge did not abuse his discretion on costs given the Defendants' unreasonable conditional stance in correspondence, so the costs order in the cause was upheld; appeal dismissed with costs RM3,000.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs of RM3,000 subject to allocatur fees