PENTAMASTER SMART SOLUTION SDN BHD VELOCITY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING SDN BHD

PENTAMASTER SMART SOLUTION SDN BHD VELOCITY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING SDN BHD

The application to amend was dismissed because the court found the amendments were not bona fide, would be ineffectual or add nothing material to the pleaded case, were served after the defendant's pleadings and at a stage when consolidated pre-trial preparations were underway causing prejudice to the defendant that could not be adequately compensated by costs, and therefore granting leave would cause injustice.

Citation
WA-22C-107-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Pentamaster Smart Solution Sdn Bhd; Defendant: Velocity Electrical Engineering Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 September 2020
Case Number
WA-22C-107-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Construction Dispute (civil) / Application to Amend Pleadings at Case Management (pre Trial)
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to amend dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Liquidated and Ascertained Damages, Pleadings Closure and Case Management, Prejudice and Costs, Inherent Jurisdiction
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Construction Law Contract Law Amendment of Pleadings Liquidated and Ascertained Damages Pleadings Closure and Case Management Prejudice and Costs Inherent Jurisdiction

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pentamaster Smart Solution Sdn Bhd

Plaintiff

Velocity Electrical Engineering Sdn Bhd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Construction Dispute (civil) / Application to Amend Pleadings at Case Management (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to amend should be granted under Order 20 r.5 RoC 2012
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's amendment application was made bona fide
  3. 3 Whether proposed amendments are material or ineffectual

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend was dismissed because the court found the amendments were not bona fide, would be ineffectual or add nothing material to the pleaded case, were served after the defendant's pleadings and at a stage when consolidated pre-trial preparations were underway causing prejudice to the defendant that could not be adequately compensated by costs, and therefore granting leave would cause injustice.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to amend dismissed

Orders

  • Application to amend (NoA filed 7.7.2020, encl.18) dismissed
  • Costs in the cause