SEVEN ALIS VENTURE SDN. BHD PERBADANAN ASET KERETAPI

SEVEN ALIS VENTURE SDN. BHD PERBADANAN ASET KERETAPI

Sessions Court findings were upheld because evidence established the appellant breached the tenancy by failing to pay rent; misrepresentation and statutory breach claims were not proven on the evidence; alleged frustration was self-induced (failures by appellant/its agent to obtain planning permission) so the doctrine of frustration did not apply; appellate intervention was unwarranted absent clear error; costs order from Sessions Court reduced by High Court.

Citation
BA-12B-107-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Defendant in Lower Court: Seven Alis Venture Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent / Plaintiff in Lower Court: Perbadanan Aset Keretapi
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Case Number
BA-12B-107-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court to High Court (appellate Review)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court judgment affirmed except as to costs
Legal Topics
Frustration of Contract, Misrepresentation, Tenancy Agreement, Planning Permission, Breach of Statutory Duty, Eviction/squatters, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Land Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Frustration of Contract Misrepresentation Tenancy Agreement +4 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seven Alis Venture Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant / Defendant in Lower Court

Perbadanan Aset Keretapi

Respondent / Plaintiff in Lower Court

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court to High Court (appellate Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant breached the tenancy agreement by failing to pay rent
  2. 2 Whether respondent made actionable misrepresentations inducing the agreements
  3. 3 Whether the contracts were frustrated and therefore void or unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

Sessions Court findings were upheld because evidence established the appellant breached the tenancy by failing to pay rent; misrepresentation and statutory breach claims were not proven on the evidence; alleged frustration was self-induced (failures by appellant/its agent to obtain planning permission) so the doctrine of frustration did not apply; appellate intervention was unwarranted absent clear error; costs order from Sessions Court reduced by High Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court judgment affirmed except as to costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Sessions Court judgment in favour of respondent affirmed