Malayan Banking Berhad 1. ) DC & A Developments Sdn Bhd 2. ) David Chua Kok Tee 3. ) Hoo Soot Khing 4. ) Chua Hung Tatt

Malayan Banking Berhad 1. ) DC & A Developments Sdn Bhd 2. ) David Chua Kok Tee 3. ) Hoo Soot Khing 4. ) Chua Hung Tatt

Defendants failed to prove any manifest error in the Certificate of Indebtedness and did not raise any bona fide triable issue; the Letter of Offer terms (monthly compounding) prevail as incorporated into the Facility Agreement; without prejudice letters are privileged and inadmissible but their exclusion does not undermine the conclusive Certificate; accordingly summary judgment is warranted for the certified sum with contractual interest and costs.

Citation
WA-22NCC-815-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Malayan Banking Berhad; Defendant: DC & A Developments Sdn Bhd; Defendant: David Chua Kok Tee; Defendant: Hoo Soot Khing; Defendant: Chua Hung Tatt
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 April 2024
Case Number
WA-22NCC-815-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment (order 14 ROC 2012)
Outcome
Summary judgment allowed in favour of Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Certificate of Indebtedness, Without Prejudice Privilege, Interest Calculation and Compounding, Guarantee Liability, Legal Charge/charge Over Property
Source Language
Malay/English
Banking Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Security/guarantee Law Summary Judgment Certificate of Indebtedness Without Prejudice Privilege +3 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malayan Banking Berhad

Plaintiff

DC & A Developments Sdn Bhd

Defendant

David Chua Kok Tee

Defendant

Hoo Soot Khing

Defendant

Chua Hung Tatt

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment (order 14 ROC 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Certificate of Indebtedness contains a manifest error
  2. 2 Whether default interest is to be compounded daily or monthly
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff provided adequate particulars of calculation of the claimed sum

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to prove any manifest error in the Certificate of Indebtedness and did not raise any bona fide triable issue; the Letter of Offer terms (monthly compounding) prevail as incorporated into the Facility Agreement; without prejudice letters are privileged and inadmissible but their exclusion does not undermine the conclusive Certificate; accordingly summary judgment is warranted for the certified sum with contractual interest and costs.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment allowed in favour of Plaintiff

Orders

  • Defendants to pay RM4,204,223.44 as at 31.8.2023 with interest at 1.5% per annum above Plaintiff's Base Lending Rate and additional default interest of 1% per annum on overdue amounts compounded monthly from 1.9.2023 until full payment
  • Defendants to pay costs of RM5,000.00 to Plaintiff, subject to allocatur