NORDIN BIN SIDIN [BERNIAGA ATAS NAMA DAN GAYA ARNAB PELANGI ENTERPRISE (JM0611457-T)] 1. MOHAMED KHALED BIN NORDIN 2. KERAJAAN NEGERI JOHOR 3. PUJB RETAIL SDN BHD [NO. SYARIKAT : 1102748-H] 4. MAJLIS AMANAH RAKYAT

NORDIN BIN SIDIN [BERNIAGA ATAS NAMA DAN GAYA ARNAB PELANGI ENTERPRISE (JM0611457-T)] 1. MOHAMED KHALED BIN NORDIN 2. KERAJAAN NEGERI JOHOR 3. PUJB RETAIL SDN BHD [NO. SYARIKAT : 1102748-H] 4. MAJLIS AMANAH RAKYAT

The Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any bona fide triable defence: he signed clear contractual documents, the Facility was disbursed in accordance with its terms, the statement of account is conclusive absent manifest error, and the Plaintiff's denials were bare and unsubstantiated; therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the Fourth Defendant's counterclaim.

Citation
JA-21NCvC-15-03/2020] (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Nordin bin Sidin; First Defendant: Mohamed Khaled bin Nordin; Second Defendant: Kerajaan Negeri Johor; Third Defendant: PUJB Retail Sdn Bhd; Fourth Defendant: Majlis Amanah Rakyat
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 December 2020
Case Number
JA-21NCvC-15-03/2020] (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Summary Judgment Application (order 14)
Outcome
Application allowed; summary judgment entered for the Fourth Defendant on its counterclaim.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Counterclaim, Misrepresentation, Disbursement of Funds, Conclusive Evidence Clause, Contra Proferentum, Estoppel, Triable Issue
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Administrative Law Summary Judgment Counterclaim Misrepresentation Disbursement of Funds +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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nordin bin Sidin

Plaintiff

Mohamed Khaled bin Nordin

First Defendant

Kerajaan Negeri Johor

Second Defendant

PUJB Retail Sdn Bhd

Third Defendant

Majlis Amanah Rakyat

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Summary Judgment Application (order 14)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff raised a triable defence to the Fourth Defendant's counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether the Fourth Defendant owed or breached a duty to conduct feasibility studies or manage the Programme
  3. 3 Whether the Facility monies were wrongfully disbursed to the Third Defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any bona fide triable defence: he signed clear contractual documents, the Facility was disbursed in accordance with its terms, the statement of account is conclusive absent manifest error, and the Plaintiff's denials were bare and unsubstantiated; therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the Fourth Defendant's counterclaim.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; summary judgment entered for the Fourth Defendant on its counterclaim.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for the Fourth Defendant on its counterclaim in the sum of MYR232,230.25
  • Costs awarded to the Fourth Defendant