HIGH POINT TECHNIC SDN BHD THRUSTBAR RESOURCES SDN BHD

HIGH POINT TECHNIC SDN BHD THRUSTBAR RESOURCES SDN BHD

The defendant's solicitors' letter and enclosed statement of account admitted the outstanding debt of RM1,934,240.30 and therefore no genuine dispute existed at the time; the 'without prejudice' label did not afford privilege; the defendant failed to particularise or provide evidence of any triable defence; accordingly summary judgment was proper and the strike out application failed.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-316-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: High Point Technic Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Thrustbar Resources Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 October 2021
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-316-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Debt/contract Claim / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Plaintiff's summary judgment application allowed; defendant's striking out application dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Without Prejudice Privilege, Striking Out, Admission of Liability, Interest and Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Evidence Summary Judgment Without Prejudice Privilege Striking Out Admission of Liability Interest and Costs

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

High Point Technic Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Thrustbar Resources Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Debt/contract Claim / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's letter and statement of account constituted a 'without prejudice' communication
  2. 2 Whether there existed triable issues to resist summary judgment
  3. 3 Alleged discrepancies in invoices and particulars of the defence

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's solicitors' letter and enclosed statement of account admitted the outstanding debt of RM1,934,240.30 and therefore no genuine dispute existed at the time; the 'without prejudice' label did not afford privilege; the defendant failed to particularise or provide evidence of any triable defence; accordingly summary judgment was proper and the strike out application failed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summary judgment application allowed; defendant's striking out application dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for Plaintiff against Defendant for RM1,934,240.30
  • Interest at 5% per annum on the judgment sum from date of the Writ to date of payment