Kok Low Kau 1. Visiber S/B 2. Hew Choong Jeng 3. Eng Chip Jin 4. Lai Suen Seng 5. Kwan Hep Chuen 6. Tan Boon Jin

Kok Low Kau 1. Visiber S/B 2. Hew Choong Jeng 3. Eng Chip Jin 4. Lai Suen Seng 5. Kwan Hep Chuen 6. Tan Boon Jin

The applications to strike out were dismissed because the pleadings disclose substantial disputes of fact and points of law that require full trial; the claims are not plainly or obviously unsustainable and it would be improper to resolve merits on conflicting affidavits at this interlocutory stage; therefore striking out under Order 18 r 19(1) was not justified.

Citation
BA-22NCVC-576-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Kok Low Kau; 1st Defendant: Visiber Sdn Bhd; 2nd Defendant: Hew Choong Jeng; 3rd Defendant: Eng Chip Jin; 4th Defendant: Lai Suen Seng; 5th Defendant: Kwan Hep Chuen; 6th Defendant: Tan Bon Jin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 March 2021
Case Number
BA-22NCVC-576-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Contractual Dispute Over Sale of Land and Guarantee / Interlocutory Striking Out Applications Under Order 18 R 19(1) Rules of Court 2012
Outcome
Both striking out applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Guarantee, Sale and Purchase Agreement, Breach of Contract, Service of Documents, Estoppel, Abuse of Process
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Property Company Law Equity Strike Out Application Guarantee Sale and Purchase Agreement +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kok Low Kau

Plaintiff

Visiber Sdn Bhd

1st Defendant

Hew Choong Jeng

2nd Defendant

Eng Chip Jin

3rd Defendant

Lai Suen Seng

4th Defendant

Kwan Hep Chuen

5th Defendant

Tan Bon Jin

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contractual Dispute Over Sale of Land and Guarantee / Interlocutory Striking Out Applications Under Order 18 R 19(1) Rules of Court 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a Sale and Purchase Agreement between the plaintiff and defendants
  2. 2 Whether the SPA and the Irrevocable Guarantee are separate transactions or form a single transaction
  3. 3 Whether the agreed purchase price is RM4,000,000 or RM6,000,000

Ratio Decidendi

The applications to strike out were dismissed because the pleadings disclose substantial disputes of fact and points of law that require full trial; the claims are not plainly or obviously unsustainable and it would be improper to resolve merits on conflicting affidavits at this interlocutory stage; therefore striking out under Order 18 r 19(1) was not justified.

Court Disposition

Both striking out applications dismissed

Orders

  • 1st to 5th Defendants' application (Enclosure 13) dismissed with costs of RM6,000.00
  • 6th Defendant's application (Enclosure 19) dismissed with costs of RM6,000.00