GLOBAL ELECTRICAL & AUTOMATION SDN BHD 1. ) MHMT ENGINEERING SDN BHD 2. ) Ketua Pengarah (Istana Budaya) 3. ) KEMENTERIAN PELANCONGAN SENI DAN BUDAYA 4. ) Jabatan Peguam Negara
Court found on the preponderance of documentary and corroborative evidence that Plaintiff executed works to the value of RM1,215,996.20 and is entitled to judgment against 1st Defendant for that sum; D2–D4 were not contractually liable because the Deed of Assignment required certification by D1 which did not occur; Plaintiff's claim for consequential/special damages failed for lack of particularised evidence; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
- Citation
- BA-21NCvC-12-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: GLOBAL ELECTRICAL & AUTOMATION SDN BHD; 1st Defendant: MHMT ENGINEERING SDN BHD; 2nd Defendant: Ketua Pengarah Istana Budaya; 3rd Defendant: Kementerian Pelancongan Seni dan Budaya; 4th Defendant: Kerajaan Malaysia
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 29 May 2024
- Case Number
- BA-21NCvC-12-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil (contract) / Judgment (high Court)
- Outcome
- Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st Defendant; Plaintiff's claims against 2nd–4th Defendants dismissed; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Deed of Assignment, Interim Payment Certification, Overpayment Adjustment, Special Damages, Certification by Superintending Officer
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
GLOBAL ELECTRICAL & AUTOMATION SDN BHD
Plaintiff
MHMT ENGINEERING SDN BHD
1st Defendant
Ketua Pengarah Istana Budaya
2nd Defendant
Kementerian Pelancongan Seni dan Budaya
3rd Defendant
Kerajaan Malaysia
4th Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract) / Judgment (high Court)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Plaintiff executed works to the value claimed (RM1,215,996.20)
- 2 Whether 2nd–4th Defendants are contractually bound to pay absent certification by 1st Defendant
- 3 Whether Plaintiff proved its claim for consequential/special damages (RM1,160,726.80)
Ratio Decidendi
Court found on the preponderance of documentary and corroborative evidence that Plaintiff executed works to the value of RM1,215,996.20 and is entitled to judgment against 1st Defendant for that sum; D2–D4 were not contractually liable because the Deed of Assignment required certification by D1 which did not occur; Plaintiff's claim for consequential/special damages failed for lack of particularised evidence; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Court Disposition
Judgment for Plaintiff against 1st Defendant; Plaintiff's claims against 2nd–4th Defendants dismissed; 1st Defendant's counterclaim dismissed.
Orders
- Judgment for the Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant for RM1,215,996.20
- Interest on the judgment sum at 5% per annum from date of judgment until realisation
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment