MID PASTEL RESOURCES SDN BHD CELCOM MOBILE SDN BHD

MID PASTEL RESOURCES SDN BHD CELCOM MOBILE SDN BHD

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant committed fraud or breached binding terms beyond the written emails; the 10‑day and 30‑day clauses were agreements to negotiate or lacked requisite certainty, the Transformation Plans were not agreed contractual terms (emails show no consensus ad idem), the additional areas (Muar and Tangkak) were ultimately granted effective 1.10.2014, and accordingly the plaintiff's claims were dismissed.

Citation
22NCvC-585-11/2015 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: MID PASTEL RESOURCES SDN BHD; Defendant: CELCOM MOBILE SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 May 2020
Case Number
22NCvC-585-11/2015 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Dispute Arising From Distributorship, Settlement Agreements and Alleged Fraud / Trial Judgment (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed for failure to prove breach or fraud
Legal Topics
Distributorship Agreement, Settlement Agreement, Agreement to Agree, Breach of Contract, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Damages, Costs, Pleadings and Admissibility
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Commercial Law Tort (fraud) Civil Procedure Evidence Law Distributorship Agreement Settlement Agreement Agreement to Agree +5 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MID PASTEL RESOURCES SDN BHD

Plaintiff

CELCOM MOBILE SDN BHD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Dispute Arising From Distributorship, Settlement Agreements and Alleged Fraud / Trial Judgment (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant deliberately delayed allocation of additional territories and committed continuous fraud
  2. 2 What were the enforceable terms of the 2nd settlement agreement and whether the Transformation Plans formed part of it or operated as compensation
  3. 3 Whether the defendant breached the 2nd settlement agreement by failing to implement the Transformation Plans

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant committed fraud or breached binding terms beyond the written emails; the 10‑day and 30‑day clauses were agreements to negotiate or lacked requisite certainty, the Transformation Plans were not agreed contractual terms (emails show no consensus ad idem), the additional areas (Muar and Tangkak) were ultimately granted effective 1.10.2014, and accordingly the plaintiff's claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed for failure to prove breach or fraud

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Defendant RM60,000.00 subject to allocatur