HI-TECH MIX SDN BHD 1. ) GIGA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 2. ) AB RAUB BIN RAZALI

HI-TECH MIX SDN BHD 1. ) GIGA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 2. ) AB RAUB BIN RAZALI

Plaintiff proved delivery and the liquidated debt; the alleged settlements were only payment arrangements that did not extinguish the original contractual rights or discharge the guarantor in the absence of evidence that the Plaintiff accepted the settlements as a full substitution of rights; defendants failed to raise affidavit evidence of a bona fide triable defence; therefore summary judgment was warranted, with liability joint and several and costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Citation
BA-22NCC-18-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: HI-TECH MIX SDN BHD; First Defendant: GIGA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD; Second Defendant (guarantor): AB RAUB BIN RAZALI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 August 2022
Case Number
BA-22NCC-18-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt Recovery (breach of Contract and Guarantee) / Summary Judgment Application Under Order 14 Rules of Court 2012 Judgment Granted
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for Plaintiff against both Defendants (jointly and severally); costs awarded to Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Settlement Agreements, Guarantor Liability, Late Payment Interest, Striking Out Application, Enforceability of Post Dated Cheques
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Company Law Guarantee Law Debt Recovery Summary Judgment Settlement Agreements Guarantor Liability +3 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HI-TECH MIX SDN BHD

Plaintiff

GIGA ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD

First Defendant

AB RAUB BIN RAZALI

Second Defendant (guarantor)

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt Recovery (breach of Contract and Guarantee) / Summary Judgment Application Under Order 14 Rules of Court 2012 Judgment Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff established a liquidated debt for goods supplied and delivered
  2. 2 Whether the 1st and 2nd settlement arrangements superseded and extinguished the original sale agreements and the Plaintiff’s cause of action
  3. 3 Whether the Guarantee Agreement discharged the guarantor by virtue of the subsequent settlements

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff proved delivery and the liquidated debt; the alleged settlements were only payment arrangements that did not extinguish the original contractual rights or discharge the guarantor in the absence of evidence that the Plaintiff accepted the settlements as a full substitution of rights; defendants failed to raise affidavit evidence of a bona fide triable defence; therefore summary judgment was warranted, with liability joint and several and costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for Plaintiff against both Defendants (jointly and severally); costs awarded to Plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for Plaintiff for the outstanding debt in the sum of RM1,675,048.49 (as at 31-1-2022) to be paid jointly and severally by the Defendants
  • Costs in favour of the Plaintiff in the sum of RM7,000.00 subject to allocator fees