GASING POTENSI CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD GCCP GRIDLAND SDN BHD

GASING POTENSI CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD GCCP GRIDLAND SDN BHD

The Court held that the issues in the defence and the counterclaim were identical and had been necessarily considered and rejected when this Court allowed the Appellant's summary judgment appeal; accordingly res judicata and issue estoppel applied and the High Court erred in refusing to strike out the counterclaim; the counterclaim was struck out and costs awarded.

Citation
A-02(IM)(NCvC)-931-05/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Gasing Potensi Construction Sdn Bhd; Respondent: Hyper Act Marketing Sdn Bhd; Respondent: GCCP Gridland Sdn Bhd
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 November 2022
Case Number
A-02(IM)(NCvC)-931-05/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (striking Out Application)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; Respondent's counterclaim struck out; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Striking Out of Counterclaim, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Mistake (contracts Act 1950 S21/s23)
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Equitable Doctrines (res Judicata/estoppel) Summary Judgment Striking Out of Counterclaim Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Mistake (contracts Act 1950 S21/s23)

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

Parties

Gasing Potensi Construction Sdn Bhd

Appellant

Hyper Act Marketing Sdn Bhd

Respondent

GCCP Gridland Sdn Bhd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (striking Out Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether issues in the respondent's counterclaim are identical to issues decided when summary judgment was allowed and thus barred by res judicata/issue estoppel
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal's allowance of summary judgment necessarily and with precision determined the points relied on in the counterclaim
  3. 3 Whether a party may plead counterclaim after summary judgment was allowed on the main claim and whether striking out is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the issues in the defence and the counterclaim were identical and had been necessarily considered and rejected when this Court allowed the Appellant's summary judgment appeal; accordingly res judicata and issue estoppel applied and the High Court erred in refusing to strike out the counterclaim; the counterclaim was struck out and costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; Respondent's counterclaim struck out; costs awarded.

Orders

  • High Court grounds set aside
  • Application to strike out the Respondent's counterclaim allowed