INNOSEVEN SDN BHD 1. ) BIG BLUE CAPITAL (M) SDN BHD 2. ) MUHAMMAD ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH yang beramal atas nama dan gaya Muhammad Zahir

INNOSEVEN SDN BHD 1. ) BIG BLUE CAPITAL (M) SDN BHD 2. ) MUHAMMAD ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH yang beramal atas nama dan gaya Muhammad Zahir

Plaintiff met O.14 preconditions and defendants failed to raise credible triable issues on affidavit; the claim is for return of stakeholder funds for breach of the JVA (not a Derry v Peek fraud action) and contemporaneous evidence contradicts defendants' denials; D2 released funds contrary to JVA conditions so summary judgment for RM750,000 against D1 and D2 was proper; D1's amended counterclaim is obviously unsustainable and abuses court process and is struck out under O.18 r.19.

Citation
WA-22NCvC-241-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: INNOSEVEN SDN BHD; First Defendant: BIG BLUE CAPITAL (M) SDN BHD; Second Defendant: MUHAMMAD ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
4 August 2022
Case Number
WA-22NCvC-241-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (recovery of Sum Under Joint Venture Agreement) / Post Hearing Applications for Summary Judgment (o.14) and Striking Out (o.18 R.19)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for plaintiff; D1 amended counterclaim struck out
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Striking Out, Stakeholder/escrow, Breach of Contract, Counterclaim, Misrepresentation, Time Is of the Essence, Costs and Interest
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Equity Trusts and Fiduciary Duty Summary Judgment Striking Out Stakeholder/escrow Breach of Contract +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

INNOSEVEN SDN BHD

Plaintiff

BIG BLUE CAPITAL (M) SDN BHD

First Defendant

MUHAMMAD ZAHIR SANJAY BIN ABDULLAH

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (recovery of Sum Under Joint Venture Agreement) / Post Hearing Applications for Summary Judgment (o.14) and Striking Out (o.18 R.19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff met O.14 preconditions and is entitled to summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether defendants raised bona fide triable issues sufficient to defeat O.14
  3. 3 Whether allegations of fraud in the statement of claim preclude O.14

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff met O.14 preconditions and defendants failed to raise credible triable issues on affidavit; the claim is for return of stakeholder funds for breach of the JVA (not a Derry v Peek fraud action) and contemporaneous evidence contradicts defendants' denials; D2 released funds contrary to JVA conditions so summary judgment for RM750,000 against D1 and D2 was proper; D1's amended counterclaim is obviously unsustainable and abuses court process and is struck out under O.18 r.19.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for plaintiff; D1 amended counterclaim struck out

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered in terms of prayers (1),(2) and (3) with date of judgment amended to 04.08.2022; judgment sums of RM750,000.00 entered against First Defendant and Second Defendant respectively
  • Prayer (4) granted: costs of RM4,000.00 awarded against each defendant, payable within 14 days from the date of the order