KEJURUTERAAN BINA OPTIMA SDN BHD (Company No.:200201005201 (572864-M)) 1. CAPITOL PROSPER SDN BHD (Company No.: 200801032798 (834135-D)) 2. CAPITOL PROSPER (UTILITIES) SDN BHD (Company No.: 201001043103 (927031-P))

KEJURUTERAAN BINA OPTIMA SDN BHD (Company No.:200201005201 (572864-M)) 1. CAPITOL PROSPER SDN BHD (Company No.: 200801032798 (834135-D)) 2. CAPITOL PROSPER (UTILITIES) SDN BHD (Company No.: 201001043103 (927031-P))

Contemporaneous documentary evidence and clear admissions established that the Plaintiff advanced RM14,241,558.00 to the Defendants, the Defendants agreed to repay via instalments to the Plaintiff’s CIMB account and defaulted; the CIMB Term Loan’s default/acceleration provisions and the parties’ documents entitled...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-22NCC-528-10/2020 (No. 2) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: KEJURUTERAAN BINA OPTIMA SDN BHD; Defendant: CAPITOL PROSPER SDN BHD; Defendant: CAPITOL PROSPER (UTILITIES) SDN BHD
Court
No. 2
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 October 2021
Case Number
WA-22NCC-528-10/2020 (No. 2) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Commercial Civil Suit (debt Recovery) / Summary Judgment Application (granted)
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of the Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Intercompany Loan, Loan Default and Acceleration, Admission of Debt, Evidence (audit Confirmations)
Contract Law Civil Procedure Company Law Banking Law Debt Recovery Summary Judgment Intercompany Loan Loan Default and Acceleration +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KEJURUTERAAN BINA OPTIMA SDN BHD

Plaintiff

CAPITOL PROSPER SDN BHD

Defendant

CAPITOL PROSPER (UTILITIES) SDN BHD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Civil Suit (debt Recovery) / Summary Judgment Application (granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the terms of the alleged intercompany loan agreement are uncertain and unenforceable
  2. 2 Whether a purported long‑standing intercompany arrangement prevents the Plaintiff’s claim
  3. 3 Whether default by the Defendants entitled the Plaintiff to accelerate the whole debt under the CIMB Term Loan terms

Ratio Decidendi

Contemporaneous documentary evidence and clear admissions established that the Plaintiff advanced RM14,241,558.00 to the Defendants, the Defendants agreed to repay via instalments to the Plaintiff’s CIMB account and defaulted; the CIMB Term Loan’s default/acceleration provisions and the parties’ documents entitled the Plaintiff to demand immediate repayment; the Defendants raised no bona fide triable issues, so summary judgment was properly granted.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of the Plaintiff

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted in terms of the Plaintiff’s application (Enclosure 13)
  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiff for the amount as stated in the affidavit affirmed on 6.10.2021 (Enclosure 61)