ACCOLADE LAND SDN BHD MASS RAPID TRANSIT CORPORATION SDN BHD & 3 LAGI

ACCOLADE LAND SDN BHD MASS RAPID TRANSIT CORPORATION SDN BHD & 3 LAGI

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal because the High Court had erred by resolving contested factual issues and imposing an undue requirement for contemporaneous written documentation for an alleged oral contract at the strike‑out stage; the pleaded facts, conduct and documents showed a reasonable cause of action that was not plainly and obviously unsustainable, therefore the claim against the 1st defendant must be reinstated and remitted for trial.

Citation
W-01(IM)(C)-184-05/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Accolade Land Sdn Bhd; 1st Respondent/defendant: Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Sdn Bhd; 2nd Respondent/defendant: Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat; 3rd Respondent/defendant: Dato Sri Haji Mohammad Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak; 4th Respondent/defendant: MMC Gamuda KVMRT (PDP) Sdn Bhd
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 April 2019
Case Number
W-01(IM)(C)-184-05/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Interlocutory Strike‑out Under Order 18 R19 (appeal From High Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; plaintiff’s claim against the 1st defendant reinstated and remitted to the High Court for trial before another judge
Legal Topics
Oral Contract, Misrepresentation (fraudulent and Negligent), Striking Out Summary Disposal, Condition Precedent Under Statute, Land Swap/compulsory Acquisition, Remittal for Trial
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Tort (negligence) Civil Procedure Administrative/public Law Property/land Acquisition Oral Contract Misrepresentation (fraudulent and Negligent) Striking Out Summary Disposal +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Accolade Land Sdn Bhd

Appellant/plaintiff

Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Sdn Bhd

1st Respondent/defendant

Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat

2nd Respondent/defendant

Dato Sri Haji Mohammad Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak

3rd Respondent/defendant

MMC Gamuda KVMRT (PDP) Sdn Bhd

4th Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Interlocutory Strike‑out Under Order 18 R19 (appeal From High Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in striking out the plaintiff’s claim as plainly and obviously unsustainable
  2. 2 Whether an alleged oral agreement and related representations gave rise to an enforceable contract or actionable misrepresentation
  3. 3 Whether the claim in negligence and duty of care is sufficiently pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal because the High Court had erred by resolving contested factual issues and imposing an undue requirement for contemporaneous written documentation for an alleged oral contract at the strike‑out stage; the pleaded facts, conduct and documents showed a reasonable cause of action that was not plainly and obviously unsustainable, therefore the claim against the 1st defendant must be reinstated and remitted for trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; plaintiff’s claim against the 1st defendant reinstated and remitted to the High Court for trial before another judge

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs in the cause
  • High Court decision striking out the claim set aside