1. ) STT TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD 2. ) SUHAIMI BIN AHMAD 3. ) ZAITON BIN ALIAS MBSB BAN BERHAD

1. ) STT TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD 2. ) SUHAIMI BIN AHMAD 3. ) ZAITON BIN ALIAS MBSB BAN BERHAD

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 preliminary requirements; discrepancies in amounts and profit rate were explained by timing, ibra' (rebate) and changes to ECOF-i and did not amount to manifest error; the Deed of Assignment did not extinguish the Defendants’ liabilities; the Notice of Termination was asserted and not contested and absence of its exhibit was not fatal where not denied; consequently Defendants failed to raise any bona fide triable issue and summary judgment was appropriate.

Citation
WA-22M-647-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: MBSB Bank Berhad; 1st Defendant: STT Technologies Sdn Bhd; 2nd Defendant: Suhaimi bin Ahmad; 3rd Defendant: Zaiton binti Alias
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 August 2020
Case Number
WA-22M-647-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial Suit Recovery of Islamic Financing Facilities / Summary Judgment Application (order 14 Roc)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for the Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Guarantee, Assignment of Proceeds, Termination of Facilities, Certificate of Indebtedness, Rebate (ibra'), Late Payment Charges (ta’widh)
Source Language
Malay/English
Banking and Finance Contract Law Civil Procedure Islamic Finance Law Summary Judgment Guarantee Assignment of Proceeds Termination of Facilities +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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MBSB Bank Berhad

Plaintiff

STT Technologies Sdn Bhd

1st Defendant

Suhaimi bin Ahmad

2nd Defendant

Zaiton binti Alias

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial Suit Recovery of Islamic Financing Facilities / Summary Judgment Application (order 14 Roc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Discrepancy between amounts claimed in Statement of Claim and amounts in Statement of Account
  2. 2 Alleged discrepancy in profit rate/pricing basis (ECOF-i)
  3. 3 Difference between sum in 2nd Supplementary Letter of Offer and Plaintiff’s claim

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff satisfied Order 14 preliminary requirements; discrepancies in amounts and profit rate were explained by timing, ibra' (rebate) and changes to ECOF-i and did not amount to manifest error; the Deed of Assignment did not extinguish the Defendants’ liabilities; the Notice of Termination was asserted and not contested and absence of its exhibit was not fatal where not denied; consequently Defendants failed to raise any bona fide triable issue and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for the Plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff in the sum of RM8,217,532.67 as at 11.3.2020
  • Interest/profit at the rate of 1.50% per annum above the Islamic Effective Cost of Fund (ECOF-i) calculated on monthly rest from 11.3.2020 until full and final settlement