NULINK SOLUTIONS SDN BHD 1. ) MITTI POWER CABLES SDN BHD 2. ) MITTI CABLES MFG SDN BHD 3. ) MOHD SAFFIAN BIN AZIZ @ AZIZUL RAHMAN

NULINK SOLUTIONS SDN BHD 1. ) MITTI POWER CABLES SDN BHD 2. ) MITTI CABLES MFG SDN BHD 3. ) MOHD SAFFIAN BIN AZIZ @ AZIZUL RAHMAN

Defendants failed to raise specific, particularised triable issues. The unstamped Settlement Agreement remained enforceable between parties per binding Federal Court authority; purchase orders corresponded with invoices and part payments; allegations of undue influence/misrepresentation were bare and unsupported;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
JA-22NCvC-163-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Nulink Solutions Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Mitti Power Cables Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Mitti Cables Mfg Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Mohd Saffian bin Aziz @ Azizul Rahman
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 June 2022
Case Number
JA-22NCvC-163-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Debt Recovery Summary Judgment Application / Application Under Order 14 R.1 ROC 2012 (summary Judgment) at High Court, Johor Bahru
Outcome
Plaintiff's summary judgment application allowed with costs
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Enforceability of Unstamped Instrument, Personal Guarantee, Undue Influence, Misrepresentation, Purchase Orders
Contract Civil Procedure Debt Recovery Stamp Law Guarantee Law Evidence Summary Judgment Enforceability of Unstamped Instrument +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nulink Solutions Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Mitti Power Cables Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Mitti Cables Mfg Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Mohd Saffian bin Aziz @ Azizul Rahman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Debt Recovery Summary Judgment Application / Application Under Order 14 R.1 ROC 2012 (summary Judgment) at High Court, Johor Bahru

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants raised triable issues to resist summary judgment under O.14 r.1 ROC 2012
  2. 2 Whether the unstamped Settlement Agreement is enforceable and admissible
  3. 3 Whether the purchase orders relied upon are valid

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to raise specific, particularised triable issues. The unstamped Settlement Agreement remained enforceable between parties per binding Federal Court authority; purchase orders corresponded with invoices and part payments; allegations of undue influence/misrepresentation were bare and unsupported; the personal guarantee was clear in limiting liability to RM1,000,000 per purchase order. Accordingly Plaintiff's O.14 application succeeded and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summary judgment application allowed with costs

Orders

  • Plaintiff's application in Enclosure 6 allowed with costs