SCOMI OILTOOLS SDN BHD PETROZCHEM OILFIELD SERVICES SDN BHD

SCOMI OILTOOLS SDN BHD PETROZCHEM OILFIELD SERVICES SDN BHD

Extension of time granted because the Defendant provided a satisfactory explanation for the 13+ month delay (oversight by previous solicitors), there was a real arguable case with a likelihood of success (the SJ Order did not account for prior payments leaving a disputed sum of RM2,700,100 and the counterclaim exceeded RM1,000,000), and the balance of relevant factors favoured permitting the appeals to be heard; therefore discretion exercised to allow Encl.3 and Encl.5 with costs in the cause.

Citation
W-02(IM)(C)-2247-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Scomi Oiltools Sdn Bhd (No. 81755-D); Respondent/plaintiff: Petrozchem Oilfield Services Sdn Bhd (No. 1008105-D)
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 June 2020
Case Number
W-02(IM)(C)-2247-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Applications for Extension of Time to File Notices of Appeal Against High Court Summary Judgment and Transfer Orders (applications Determined)
Outcome
Applications for extension of time to file notices of appeal (Encl.3 and Encl.5) allowed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Summary Judgment, Transfer of Proceedings, Estoppel by Conduct, Monetary Jurisdiction of Sessions Court
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Appeal Estoppel Contract Jurisdictional Threshold Extension of Time Summary Judgment Transfer of Proceedings +2 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scomi Oiltools Sdn Bhd (No. 81755-D)

Appellant/defendant

Petrozchem Oilfield Services Sdn Bhd (No. 1008105-D)

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Applications for Extension of Time to File Notices of Appeal Against High Court Summary Judgment and Transfer Orders (applications Determined)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time should be granted to file appeals against the Summary Judgment Order and the Transfer Order
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of estoppel precluded the Defendant from challenging the judgment given prior payments and conduct
  3. 3 Whether the disputed sums and counterclaim exceed the Sessions Court monetary threshold such that transfer was improper

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time granted because the Defendant provided a satisfactory explanation for the 13+ month delay (oversight by previous solicitors), there was a real arguable case with a likelihood of success (the SJ Order did not account for prior payments leaving a disputed sum of RM2,700,100 and the counterclaim exceeded RM1,000,000), and the balance of relevant factors favoured permitting the appeals to be heard; therefore discretion exercised to allow Encl.3 and Encl.5 with costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Applications for extension of time to file notices of appeal (Encl.3 and Encl.5) allowed.

Orders

  • Both applications allowed as prayed in Encl.3 and Encl.5
  • Costs to be in the cause of the appeals