Itramas Technology Sdn Bhd Infologic Pte Ltd & 2 Lg

Itramas Technology Sdn Bhd Infologic Pte Ltd & 2 Lg

The court found defendants lawfully entitled to pursue winding up and advertisement given the plaintiff's non‑payment of enforced arbitral awards; plaintiff failed to prove malice or loss from the petition; plaintiff did not validly terminate the contract and by conduct waived timely delivery and failed to mitigate loss because non‑delivery resulted from plaintiff's failure to obtain import permits and pay duties (not defendants' actions); the Fleetsol claim was previously dismissed in arbitration and is estopped; accordingly all causes of action fail and the plaintiff's action is dismissed with costs.

Citation
WA-22NCC-67-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Itramas Technology Sdn Bhd; 1st Defendant: Infologic Pte Ltd; 2nd and 3rd Defendants: Chow King Tock; Wu Ee Tsien
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 November 2019
Case Number
WA-22NCC-67-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract/commercial Enforcement of Arbitral Award) / Judgment (full Trial)
Outcome
Plaintiff's action dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitral Award, Termination of Contract and Decree for Specific Performance, Winding Up Petition and Advertising, Mitigation of Damages, Res Judicata/estoppel From Arbitration Award, Adverse Inference for Non Production of Witness Evidence, Customs/import Permit Obligations
Source Language
Malay/English
Arbitration Contract Company (winding Up) Tort (malicious Prosecution) Evidence Enforcement of Arbitral Award Termination of Contract and Decree for Specific Performance Winding Up Petition and Advertising +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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Itramas Technology Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Infologic Pte Ltd

1st Defendant

Chow King Tock; Wu Ee Tsien

2nd and 3rd Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract/commercial Enforcement of Arbitral Award) / Judgment (full Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the winding up petition was filed and advertised maliciously
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff validly terminated the contract for non-delivery of remaining goods
  3. 3 Whether the defendants were obliged or in breach in respect of delivery and point of delivery

Ratio Decidendi

The court found defendants lawfully entitled to pursue winding up and advertisement given the plaintiff's non‑payment of enforced arbitral awards; plaintiff failed to prove malice or loss from the petition; plaintiff did not validly terminate the contract and by conduct waived timely delivery and failed to mitigate loss because non‑delivery resulted from plaintiff's failure to obtain import permits and pay duties (not defendants' actions); the Fleetsol claim was previously dismissed in arbitration and is estopped; accordingly all causes of action fail and the plaintiff's action is dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's action dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claims dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs of RM50000.00 subject to allocator