1. ) MOHD ADRIN BIN MOHD DAUD 2. ) NURUL IZZWANA BINTI ABDUL RAHIM 1. ) ABDUH WAREN BIN KANDIL 2. ) ARYA NAILAH BINTI JUBIT RUDY

1. ) MOHD ADRIN BIN MOHD DAUD 2. ) NURUL IZZWANA BINTI ABDUL RAHIM 1. ) ABDUH WAREN BIN KANDIL 2. ) ARYA NAILAH BINTI JUBIT RUDY

Summary judgment was denied because material factual and legal issues remain in dispute — including the nature of the funds, the existence of contractual repayment terms, unjust enrichment and estoppel — which require a full trial for proper resolution.

Citation
WA-A72NCvC-2016-05/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mohd Adrin bin Mohd Daud; Plaintiff: Nurul Izzwana binti Abdul Rahim; Defendant: Abduh Waren bin Kandil; Defendant: Arya Nailah binti Jubit Rudy
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 November 2024
Case Number
WA-A72NCvC-2016-05/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim (summary Judgment Application Under Order 14, Rules of Court 2012) / Summary Judgment Application Denied; Matter Set for Full Trial
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed; matter fixed for full trial.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14 Rules of Court 2012), Existence of Contract, Friendly Loan Vs Investment, Repayment Terms, Unjust Enrichment, Estoppel, Triable Issues
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Equitable Remedies Unjust Enrichment Estoppel Summary Judgment (order 14 Rules of Court 2012) Existence of Contract Friendly Loan Vs Investment +2 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd Adrin bin Mohd Daud

Plaintiff

Nurul Izzwana binti Abdul Rahim

Plaintiff

Abduh Waren bin Kandil

Defendant

Arya Nailah binti Jubit Rudy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim (summary Judgment Application Under Order 14, Rules of Court 2012) / Summary Judgment Application Denied; Matter Set for Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Existence of a valid contract between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the funds were a friendly loan or a contractual investment with obligation to repay
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiffs proved repayment terms and reliance

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment was denied because material factual and legal issues remain in dispute — including the nature of the funds, the existence of contractual repayment terms, unjust enrichment and estoppel — which require a full trial for proper resolution.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed; matter fixed for full trial.

Orders

  • Summary judgment application denied
  • Full trial to determine disputed issues (contract validity, repayment terms, unjust enrichment, estoppel)